Glibc-ports status? Creating glibc-ports tarball for 2.13?

[Carlos O'Donell <carlos at codesourcery dot com>]

Joseph,

Thank you for creating the glibc-2.13 tag an branch (3 weeks ago) for
glibc-ports!

libc-ports,

Sorry for the second email. Content is identical.

Status?
=======

What is the status of all the machines in glibc-ports with respect to
the glibc-2.13 tag in libc-ports?

Alpha - Richard?
ARM - Joseph/Phil?
HPPA - Carlos (myself): Does not build, missing patches.
M68K - AS?
MIPS - Joseph/AJ?
Power - Ryan?

I would like to know the status of the machines such that a public
2.13.N announcement sets the appropriate expectation for users of
these tarballs.

Note that there has currently been no announcement on libc-announce
about this release. My plan is to make a release announcement at some
point soon.

Tarball?
========

I was asked to create a glibc-ports 2.13 tarball. I see two courses of
action (in truth we could do both):

(a) Create a tarball from the current glibc-2.13 tag. Even if your
machine doesn't build against the upstream glibc-2.13 tarball, it's a
common place for packagers to start.

(b) Ask glibc-ports maintainers to chekin any lingering patches.
Create a new "glibc-2.13.1" release with some cherry-picks, and create
a tarball from *that* tag name for both glibc and glibc-ports.

The intent is to move towards a process where the glibc-ports tarballs
work correctly with glibc tarballs (of the same version) without
additional patches. It feels like this would make life simpler for the
packagers.

Is that a worthy or even useful goal for the community?

Otherwise the process is mostly mechanical, offering only a common
tarball for patching.

Comments?

Cheers,
Carlos.
-- 
Carlos O'Donell
Mentor Graphics / CodeSourcery
carlos@codesourcery.com
+1 (650) 331-3385 x716