On 2022-11-11 07:11, Aaron Ballman wrote:
Clang doesn't require such a linker (we work with various system linkers).
As long as the system linkers continue to work as they have
traditionally worked, we're fine.
the frontend perspective, we can't tell the difference between
"trust me this is
On 2022-11-11 07:11, Aaron Ballman wrote:
We believe the runtime behavior is sufficiently dangerous to
warrant a conservative view that any call to a function will be a call
that gets executed at runtime, hence a definitive signature mismatch
is something we feel comfortable diagnosing (in some f
Wookey writes:
> Now, I'm not yet sure if just having autoconf 2.72 will actually break
> things. AIUI, these changes only apply where LFS
> (-D_FILE_OFFSET_BITS=64) is turned on, so in Debian at least, where that
> is not the default on 32bit arches, maybe this is OK. But probably quite
> a lot
On 2022-11-12 12:23, Wookey wrote:
we can't just have everyone who enabled LFS sometime in the
last 20 years suddenly being forced into the time_t change (can we?)
We've done it in the past.
AC_SYS_LARGEFILE originally was in Gnulib, before it migrated to
Autoconf. Originally it affected only
On 2022-11-12 11:15 -0800, Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 2022-11-12 10:50, Bruno Haible wrote:
> > I'm saying
> > "tiny" because we are still 15 years away, and new releases of the (not
> > many) affected packages are likely to come in the next 1-2 years.
>
> Not so "tiny", I'm afraid. My department is
On 2022-11-12 10:50, Bruno Haible wrote:
I'm saying
"tiny" because we are still 15 years away, and new releases of the (not
many) affected packages are likely to come in the next 1-2 years.
Not so "tiny", I'm afraid. My department is still running a server with
libraries and executables that a
Paul Eggert wrote:
> On 2022-11-12 06:16, Zack Weinberg wrote:
> > I am going to go ahead and do this if nobody raises a concrete objection
> > within the next 24 hours.
>
> I object to a simple reversion, as this will cause problems downstream
> with Gnulib-using applications, several of which h
On 2022-11-11 18:20, Zack Weinberg wrote:
I don’t think Paul considered the new behavior of AC_SYS_LARGEFILE to be
overriding the glibc maintainers. Rather, I think he was only thinking
about applications, not libraries, and only about source distribution.
No, I was thinking about libraries as
On 2022-11-12 06:16, Zack Weinberg wrote:
I am going to go ahead and do this if nobody raises a concrete objection
within the next 24 hours.
I object to a simple reversion, as this will cause problems downstream
with Gnulib-using applications, several of which have already been
released assum
Demi Marie Obenour writes:
> On 11/10/22 15:19, Paul Eggert wrote:
>> Here's the main Autoconf issue issue with bool. Traditionally, Autoconf
>> supported K&R C, C89, C99, etc. At some point (I'm not sure when),
>> Autoconf started requiring C89 or later. Is it now OK for Autoconf to
>> requi
Sam James writes:
>> On 12 Nov 2022, at 02:20, Zack Weinberg via Libc-alpha
>> wrote:
>> I am honestly not sure what to do about this in the long term, but for
>> the proposed “this weekend, just bugfixes” Autoconf 2.72, I do think it
>> makes sense to back out change #2, only — that is, AC_SYS
11 matches
Mail list logo
