Hello,
Svante Signell, on Sat 10 Dec 2016 20:52:20 +0100, wrote:
> On Thu, 2016-12-08 at 16:32 +0100, Richard Braun wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 03:40:34PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
> >
> > > OK! Then maybe the sbrk() feature should be flagged as not
> > > available in order
> > > not to
Svante Signell, on Sat 10 Dec 2016 20:29:51 +0100, wrote:
> Is there still time for the file record lock patches? I've been running
> hurd/glibc locally with them for years now.
Okay, but there were comments since the last submission, notably:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-hurd/2016-02/m
On Thu, 2016-12-08 at 16:32 +0100, Richard Braun wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 08, 2016 at 03:40:34PM +0100, Svante Signell wrote:
>
> > OK! Then maybe the sbrk() feature should be flagged as not
> > available in order
> > not to fool configure and the compiler. In fact FreeBSD/arm64 did
> > exactly that,
Hi Thomas,
Is there still time for the file record lock patches? I've been running
hurd/glibc locally with them for years now.
Thanks!
On Sat, 2016-12-10 at 18:35 +0100, Justus Winter wrote:
> Thomas Schwinge writes:
>
> > Will it be OK to move the release date towards end of
> > November? (Y
Thomas Schwinge writes:
> Will it be OK to move the release date towards end of November? (Yay,
> one more month for getting stuff finished for inclusion...) ;'-\
Or two (mea culpa), but I'm actually glad we did have a chance to merge
some more stuff ;) So, anything else missing for Hurd 0.9?
