On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:06:39 -0800, Bryan Kadzban
wrote:
> I'm not sure if that's the best setup; we'll have to make sure at each
> glibc release (until the bug is fixed) that no new private-futex tests
> are added. (That the sed is still equivalent to the patch.) It'd be
> nice if the sed cou
Matthew Burgess wrote:
> On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:06:39 -0800, Bryan Kadzban
> wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure if that's the best setup; we'll have to make sure at each
>> glibc release (until the bug is fixed) that no new private-futex tests
>> are added. (That the sed is still equivalent to the patch.
We are looking at lfs-6.8-rc1 somewhere around mid February with a
-stable release on March 1. Currently we are waiting for the next
releases of grub, util-linux, and possibly glibc.
We are reviewing our options for the glibc --enable-kernel issue and
will also be updating perl.
Please let us
Bruce Dubbs wrote:
> Matthew Burgess wrote:
>> On Mon, 24 Jan 2011 20:06:39 -0800, Bryan Kadzban
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not sure if that's the best setup; we'll have to make sure at each
>>> glibc release (until the bug is fixed) that no new private-futex tests
>>> are added. (That the sed is stil
