From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from [131.111.8.137] (helo=ppsw-7.csi.cam.ac.uk) by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MdjGE-0002kQ-5J for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org; Wed, 19 Aug 2009 13:23:27 +0200 X-Cam-AntiVirus: no malware found X-Cam-SpamDetails: not scanned X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Received: from arcturus.eng.cam.ac.uk ([129.169.154.73]:33181) by ppsw-7.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.157]:25) with esmtpsa (PLAIN:jic23) (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) id 1Mdizc-0003cW-Nh (Exim 4.70) for openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org (return-path ); Wed, 19 Aug 2009 12:06:12 +0100 Message-ID: <4A8BDCAA.7070205@cam.ac.uk> Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 12:06:18 +0100 From: Jonathan Cameron User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.22 (X11/20090803) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org References: <4A8960BC.4000603@cam.ac.uk> <200908171606.57153.holger+oe@freyther.de> <1250521270.27980.6.camel@mill.internal.reciva.com> <1250521375.27980.8.camel@mill.internal.reciva.com> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Subject: Re: [PATCH] glibc 2.7 and 2.9 (arm): Remove unnecessary asm/page.h include X-BeenThere: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Reply-To: openembedded-devel@lists.openembedded.org List-Id: Using the OpenEmbedded metadata to build Distributions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 19 Aug 2009 11:23:42 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Otavio Salvador wrote: > Hello Phil > > On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Phil Blundell wrote: >> Oh, and, as for bumping PR: in this case I would suggest not doing it. >> The output binaries should be identical with and without that header, >> and for folks doing online upgrades it is a bit of a pain to have glibc >> rebuild unnecessarily. > > I disagree and think it ought to be bumped so it gets deployed and > tested as soon as possible. > > People that cares about online updates are supposed to be using stable > to reduce it. > Happy to go with either option, but keen to get this merged soon. Can we come to a consensus on whether to bump the PR? If we do want to, can someone push this to the repository. Thanks, Jonathan