This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Re: glibc 2.1.96

To: "H. Peter Anvin" <hpa at transmeta dot com>
Subject: Re: glibc 2.1.96
From: Ulrich Drepper <drepper at redhat dot com>
Date: 30 Oct 2000 11:57:02 -0800
Cc: libc-alpha at sources dot redhat dot com
References: <39FD2595.8AF1EB8C@transmeta.com><m34s1upy44.fsf@otr.mynet.cygnus.com><39FDCC05.32981C50@transmeta.com>
Reply-To: drepper at cygnus dot com (Ulrich Drepper)

"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@transmeta.com> writes:

> I believe I wrote this back as well: this will affect *ALL* applications,
> even those that don't need large file support.  This change really needs
> to happen, or any non-LFS application is DANGEROUS AND UNUSABLE.

Right.  So go out and preach to people to use LFS.  LFS is not part of
any standard since it is assumed to become the standard in due time.
This is what has to happen now.  You simply cannot change the ino_t
size without bumping the libc major version since people define
variables of this type.

-- 
---------------.                          ,-.   1325 Chesapeake Terrace
Ulrich Drepper  \    ,-------------------'   \  Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA
Red Hat          `--' drepper at redhat.com   `------------------------

Follow-Ups:
- Re: glibc 2.1.96
  - From: H. Peter Anvin

References:
- glibc 2.1.96
  - From: H. Peter Anvin
- Re: glibc 2.1.96
  - From: Ulrich Drepper
- Re: glibc 2.1.96
  - From: H. Peter Anvin

Index Nav:	[Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav:	[Date Prev] [Date Next]	[Thread Prev] [Thread Next]