From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Gustavo Zacarias Date: Tue, 08 Apr 2014 08:52:44 -0300 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] eglibc: bump to version 2.19 SVN R25243 In-Reply-To: <20140407154148.2b35dd34@skate> References: <1396875879-22199-1-git-send-email-gustavo@zacarias.com.ar> <20140407152919.2d1147fb@skate> <5342A9EB.1030801@zacarias.com.ar> <20140407154148.2b35dd34@skate> Message-ID: <5343E30C.1090703@zacarias.com.ar> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net On 04/07/2014 10:41 AM, Thomas Petazzoni wrote: >> My opinion is that we should just keep it as simple as possible. >> If there's a special need for some architecture (like microblaze) let it >> be so, but really unless we know there's some issue or exception i don't >> think there's much value in keeping multiple versions, specially since >> *glibc is backwards ABI compatible. > > Fine with me. My impression so far was that for critical components > such as gcc/binutils/gdb/libc, we were keeping older versions a little > bit longer to give it some time to test the newer version before > forcing everyone to upgrade. Surely we need to continue to do this with > gcc, where most of the 4.x.0 versions are typically broken on at least > one architecture. D'oh, eglibc 2.19 is broken for PowerPC SPE ABI. So it seems we'll do two versions after all. I'll send a revised patch shortly. Regards.