[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: A plan for the Hurd-specific glibc repository

From: Thomas Schwinge
Subject: Re: A plan for the Hurd-specific glibc repository
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 2010 15:17:00 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.2 (gnu/linux)


On 2010-01-23 13:16, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> Thomas Schwinge, le Sat 23 Jan 2010 07:13:30 -0500, a écrit :
>>       * There will be patches that are really only relevant to Debian.
>>         We can either still keep them in R(libc) too, or these stay
>>         manually maintained in P(hurd,D(libc)) as they're now.
> I had a quick look at the Debian patches, local-enable-ldconfig.diff
> probably fits in that category, as the header mentions: « Upstream
> disagrees with this patch, but I'm putting it in so that we have
> expected Debian behaviour on the Hurd. » It seems to really be a
> Debian-specific patch.

Yep, stuff like that is what I had in mind for this category.

> Others patches should be fine and it should be possible to just add them
> automatically, the header of the patch (lines before ^---$) being used
> as the git comment.

Yes.  I'll (have to) examine each one individually, though -- I already
have a bunch of them in my local Git glibc topic branches (from the last
time I was trying to get this repository populated), and I hope / guess
that I can simply convert these blobs into TopGit patches, and later diff
them against the respective Debian patches to confirm that there are no
functional differences.

> About that git comment, it should probably be preserved, so it can be
> included automatically in patches in Debian and for submission. I guess
> TopGit supports that?

Right, that's how I understand it, and what I had in mind.


Attachment: pgpMWeMm6FAiY.pgp
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]