Date: Sun, 14 Dec 1997 14:12:34 -0800 (PST) From: Alex <garbanzo@hooked.net> To: John Polstra <jdp@polstra.com> Cc: current <current@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: problems with gzip'd executables Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971214141024.256D-100000@zippy.dyn.ml.org> In-Reply-To: <199712141959.LAA20309@austin.polstra.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 14 Dec 1997, John Polstra wrote: > > Personally, I feel that you should just drop the hacks to > > handle old emacs binaries and send a clear heads-up to > > current@FreeBSD.ORG. Current is for developers - we should have the > > hardware to handle an Emacs re-compile :-) > > I agree with you. I would like to put a patch into the emacs port > before I back out the ld.so hack, though. I probably can't get around > to doing that for about a week. I have the patch, but I don't have > any more time to spend on this until next weekend. I agree with you guys here too. Running -current, recompiling a few programs isn't supposed to be unexpected. Afterall with the procfs changes I've recompiled w, ps, and top (and my lkms) quite a few times. 100% binary compatibility isn't the goal (I think). > Meanwhile, it turns out that the gzipped executable problem was > really a bug in imgact_gzip.c. So I committed a fix for that. Thanks for committing a fix. I'll grab it in my nightly cvsup. - alex
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.96.971214141024.256D-100000>