I read that part a bit too fast
Samuel Thibault, on mar. 09 janv. 2018 13:00:44 +0100, wrote:
> Ludovic Courtès, on mar. 09 janv. 2018 12:57:40 +0100, wrote:
> > Samuel Thibault skribis:
> >
> > > For non-Debian distributions, you may want
> > > to pick up the hurd exec_filename_ patches from
>
Samuel Thibault, on mar. 09 janv. 2018 13:00:44 +0100, wrote:
> Ludovic Courtès, on mar. 09 janv. 2018 12:57:40 +0100, wrote:
> > Also, now that you’re a glibc maintainer for the Hurd part, what would
> > you think of doing a “mass commit” (with a lightweight re-review
> > process) of all the patch
Ludovic Courtès, on mar. 09 janv. 2018 12:57:40 +0100, wrote:
> Samuel Thibault skribis:
>
> > For non-Debian distributions, you may want
> > to pick up the hurd exec_filename_ patches from
> > https://anonscm.debian.org/git/pkg-hurd/hurd.git/tree/debian/patches
> > and the local-exec_filename.di
Hello!
Samuel Thibault skribis:
> For non-Debian distributions, you may want
> to pick up the hurd exec_filename_ patches from
> https://anonscm.debian.org/git/pkg-hurd/hurd.git/tree/debian/patches
> and the local-exec_filename.diff patch from
> https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/pkg-glibc/glibc.gi
Hello,
Better late than never :)
I got triggered by an issue which was making both mig and gnumach fail
to build from source :) which was triggered by Svante's turning the
exec() paths into absolute, which made shellscripts' $0 always absolute.
So I rolled up my sleeves, I changes the RPC a bit t
Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-04-08 13:50:28)
> Justus Winter, le Tue 08 Apr 2014 13:46:26 +0200, a écrit :
> > Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-04-08 02:18:13)
> > > Well, I'm not the one to be convinced: it's only Roland which can ack
> > > the glibc part, and thus the whole idea of the RPC addition
Justus Winter, le Tue 08 Apr 2014 13:46:26 +0200, a écrit :
> Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-04-08 02:18:13)
> > Well, I'm not the one to be convinced: it's only Roland which can ack
> > the glibc part, and thus the whole idea of the RPC addition. One "just"
> > needs to explain him why we really n
Hi,
Quoting Samuel Thibault (2014-04-08 02:18:13)
> Well, I'm not the one to be convinced: it's only Roland which can ack
> the glibc part, and thus the whole idea of the RPC addition. One "just"
> needs to explain him why we really need it.
I thought that this patch series was necessary for fak
Well, I'm not the one to be convinced: it's only Roland which can ack
the glibc part, and thus the whole idea of the RPC addition. One "just"
needs to explain him why we really need it.
Samuel
