Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
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>