Date: Sat, 13 Jul 2013 23:40:39 +0200 From: Jilles Tjoelker <jilles@stack.nl> To: Robert Millan <rmh@freebsd.org> Cc: Konstantin Belousov <kostikbel@gmail.com>, Justin Hibbits <jhibbits@freebsd.org>, Tijl Coosemans <tijl@coosemans.org>, Gleb Smirnoff <glebius@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: libutil in Debian Message-ID: <20130713214039.GA36164@stack.nl> In-Reply-To: <CAOfDtXOwVwx=3JaCGzEXpJgA6E-PNJajs%2BC7NWLt331GMhHg5A@mail.gmail.com> References: <CAGE5yCpD7WxW6vFtUggYQ%2BBayi1p7fxzq41%2Ba6RCJagqPHV=Fw@mail.gmail.com> <6E057FD0-9054-44CD-A806-3AFD8A7196CC@bsdimp.com> <CAGE5yCqAFqOEs_93KgojsgkOO%2B3LVTrhX6%2BRg_BS9OLMxbcfMA@mail.gmail.com> <D99F95A3-81D2-47D5-8D4F-D3CCBEB251EE@bsdimp.com> <CAGE5yCratkaVjAsyJZz=zPKxAWpCnFyjjULWeUU_MSxN-_yTJA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOfDtXNWva%2BKY6G_%2Ba0e158AA%2BNVrSvcvJ3=bzx%2B1cRsB=t=DQ@mail.gmail.com> <CAHSQbTBNR3TwHifDN1p5t=tHwvNRYSY-KgVxPeM=FENE2mZwwA@mail.gmail.com> <CAOfDtXMgX1VT38yhjPOJvVo60fzpdNfa1tYCBpt2gBRp8LbzVg@mail.gmail.com> <CAHSQbTC_nkY9__VEo1eJt461SMYE6qmWQV5RPNuCb0aaucZwJw@mail.gmail.com> <CAOfDtXOwVwx=3JaCGzEXpJgA6E-PNJajs%2BC7NWLt331GMhHg5A@mail.gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 10:42:18AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > 2013/7/9 Justin Hibbits <jhibbits@freebsd.org>: > > I was thinking more in terms of adding the functions to the debian local > > patch set. I don't know how intrusive it would be, but it may be worth > > looking into. > You may not believe this, but it is even worse. Can you believe they > even refused to add trivial syscall stubs, such as nlm_syscall()? They > say this "belongs elsewhere" even though it's -lc in FreeBSD like most > (all?) syscall stubs. > Look at the kind of workarounds we have to endure: > http://anonscm.debian.org/viewvc/glibc-bsd/trunk/freebsd-utils/debian/patches/036_nfs_glibc.diff?revision=4047&view=markup glibc upstream appears indecisive about whether to add stubs for special-use syscalls. There are more packages with their own stubs. Note that FreeBSD libc has nlm_syscall() under the FBSDprivate_1.0 symbol version, reflecting the lower level of guarantees about its ABI because it is only supposed to be used by rpc.lockd. > Heck, even the trivial update to <sys/queue.h>, which was *already* of > BSD origin since ancient times, was restricted to only apply on our > port, so that the new macros (e.g. LIST_FOREACH_SAFE) were not > available on Debian GNU/Linux. I would say that a Debian patch is indeed not the first thing to try for a <sys/queue.h> update, since it makes things incompatible between Linux distributions. Rather, that should be done in glibc upstream. About copyright assignment, note that the original file is already not copyright FSF and was added to glibc anyway. -- Jilles Tjoelker
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20130713214039.GA36164>