Re: Undo setrlimit patch for 2.1.3

[Thorsten Kukuk <kukuk at suse dot de>]

Hi,

On Sun, Jan 23, Jakub Jelinek wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 23, 2000 at 05:49:25PM +0100, Thorsten Kukuk wrote:
> > same time, and not months later.
> > 
> > Cristian, I hope the patch is ok for you ?
> 
> We have this in the tree (sorry for not posting it here but it was a very
> last patch I mailed before I went home).
> I have reverted even signedness rlim_t changes because it really does not
> fix anything, it is just a new feature, but I have kept the @GLIBC_2.1.3
> symbols, so that binaries already compiled against it continue to work and
> we don't have to change that symbol in 2.1.90 (but symbols @GLIBC_2.0 are
> default).

No, I think this is the wrong way. We should remove the setrlimit@GLIBC_2.1.3
symbols, too. It is no problem to break binary compatiblity with test
versions. But to let the 2.1.3 version in is ugly and not necessary.

  Thorsten

-- 
Thorsten Kukuk       http://www.suse.de/~kukuk/       kukuk@suse.de
SuSE GmbH            Schanzaeckerstr. 10            90443 Nuernberg
Linux is like a Vorlon.  It is incredibly powerful, gives terse,
cryptic answers and has a lot of things going on in the background.