[gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Seemant Kulleen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 440 bytes --]

Hi All,

We'd like to receive comments (the negative ones, especially) for moving
gcc-3.2.3-r1, glibc-2.3.2-r1 and binutils-2.14.90.0.2 from ~arch to arch (at least for x86 platform).

Thanks,

-- 
Seemant Kulleen
Developer and Project Co-ordinator,
Gentoo Linux					http://dev.gentoo.org/~seemant

Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x3458780E
Key fingerprint = 23A9 7CB5 9BBB 4F8D 549B 6593 EDA2 65D8 3458 780E

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Spider]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 762 bytes --]

begin  quote
On Wed, 16 Jul 2003 06:50:33 -0700
Seemant Kulleen <seemant@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Hi All,
> 
> We'd like to receive comments (the negative ones, especially) for
> moving gcc-3.2.3-r1, glibc-2.3.2-r1 and binutils-2.14.90.0.2 from
> ~arch to arch (at least for x86 platform).


Thats all well and good with me, I'm currently (and successfully)
running a stable system based on the following:


Portage 2.0.48-r1 (default-x86-1.4, gcc-3.2.3, glibc-2.3.2-r1
binutils-2.13.90.0.18 )  

And no complaints there in the interaction on a small system.  And all
have performed nicely on ~x86 as well.


//Spider

-- 
begin  .signature
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Tom Syroid]

Seemant,

Emerging said apps as we speak; will advise.

The box is a (was ;-) stable dual 2200+ Athlon system with 2.4.20-rc5 and 
2.6.0-test1, so any potential weirdness should surface in relatively short 
order.

Best,
/tom

--On Wednesday, July 16, 2003 06:50:33 -0700 Seemant Kulleen 
<seemant@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> We'd like to receive comments (the negative ones, especially) for moving
> gcc-3.2.3-r1, glibc-2.3.2-r1 and binutils-2.14.90.0.2 from ~arch to arch
> (at least for x86 platform).
>
> Thanks,
>
> --
> Seemant Kulleen
> Developer and Project Co-ordinator,
> Gentoo Linux					http://dev.gentoo.org/~seemant
>
> Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x3458780E
> Key fingerprint = 23A9 7CB5 9BBB 4F8D 549B 6593 EDA2 65D8 3458 780E





--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Peter Ruskin]

On Wednesday 16 Jul 2003 14:50, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> We'd like to receive comments (the negative ones, especially) for
> moving gcc-3.2.3-r1, glibc-2.3.2-r1 and binutils-2.14.90.0.2 from
> ~arch to arch (at least for x86 platform).
>
> Thanks,

Will the others work if I stick with glibc-2.3.1?  I use winex and it
won't work with 2.3.2.

Peter
-- 
==================================================
Gentoo Linux:	Gentoo Base System version 1.4.3.8p1
kernel-2.4.22_pre2-gss i686 AMD Athlon(tm) XP 1600+
==================================================


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Brad Laue]

Peter Ruskin wrote:

> Will the others work if I stick with glibc-2.3.1?  I use winex and it
> won't work with 2.3.2.
> 
> Peter

You sure? I thought it was just a matter of not working with 2.3.2 if 
NPTL was enabled (it won't be by default).

Brad


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Tony Clark]

On Wednesday 16 July 2003 15.50, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> We'd like to receive comments (the negative ones, especially) for moving
> gcc-3.2.3-r1, glibc-2.3.2-r1 and binutils-2.14.90.0.2 from ~arch to arch
> (at least for x86 platform).

I think I had issues with gcc causing an unnecessary burn of cpu cycles with 
mythtv a while ago, I'll retest that.  There was also issues with glibc and 
the codeweavers stuff, which I guess is wine related.

tony
-- 
Contract ASIC and FPGA design.
Telephone +46 702 894 667
http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=vindex&search=0x633E2623



--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Kumba]

Seemant Kulleen wrote:

> Hi All,
> 
> We'd like to receive comments (the negative ones, especially) for moving
> gcc-3.2.3-r1, glibc-2.3.2-r1 and binutils-2.14.90.0.2 from ~arch to arch (at least for x86 platform).
> 
> Thanks,
> 

All work fine for me.  I just recently sent an ebuild patch to azarah to 
allow glibc-2.3.2-r1 to build on sparc64, so we might need a little 
longer on testing it (Although it works fine on my Blade 100).  I've 
been pondering marking this stable on mips for some time.  My x86 box 
ran this for a time, until I moved to glibc-2.3.2-r2 and gcc-3.3.

--Kumba

-- 
"Such is oft the course of deeds that move the wheels of the world: 
small hands do them because they must, while the eyes of the great are 
elsewhere."  --Elrond


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Alex Veber]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday 16 July 2003 14:54, Brad Laue wrote:
> Peter Ruskin wrote:
> > Will the others work if I stick with glibc-2.3.1?  I use winex and it
> > won't work with 2.3.2.
> >
> > Peter
>
> You sure? I thought it was just a matter of not working with 2.3.2 if
> NPTL was enabled (it won't be by default).

wine works with all versions of glibc, NPTL or not.
winex only works WITH NPTL, not without.

> Brad
>
>
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

- -- 
Alex Veber
Developer
Gentoo Linux

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/FZVC0Q5UUdinJT4RAjBwAJsElngUebm9TskwEdpYYjYO8CylQQCgoqsz
GYDHohpu3ZHwQ3r2VgT26pY=
=y7Je
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Peter Ruskin]

On Wednesday 16 Jul 2003 19:11, Alex Veber wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 July 2003 14:54, Brad Laue wrote:
> > Peter Ruskin wrote:
> > > Will the others work if I stick with glibc-2.3.1?  I use winex
> > > and it won't work with 2.3.2.
> > >
> > You sure? I thought it was just a matter of not working with 2.3.2
> > if NPTL was enabled (it won't be by default).
>
> wine works with all versions of glibc, NPTL or not.
> winex only works WITH NPTL, not without.
>
Well, that's good news Alex.  I never heard of NPTL so I did a search
of portage and a grep of /usr/src/linux/.config and came up with...
nothing.  Care to educate me a little?

Peter
-- 
==================================================
Gentoo Linux:	Gentoo Base System version 1.4.3.8p1
kernel-2.4.22_pre2-gss i686 AMD Athlon(tm) XP 1600+
==================================================


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Matt Rickard]

> We'd like to receive comments (the negative ones, especially) for
> moving gcc-3.2.3-r1, glibc-2.3.2-r1 and binutils-2.14.90.0.2 from
> ~arch to arch (at least for x86 platform).
> 

There are still a few minor issues with ProPolice in gcc-3.2.3-r1.  I'm
working with Hiroaki Etoh (the developer of the patch) to fix
these.  However, they are rare even for people who are
using -fstack-protector, and of no consequence to those who don't.  

I'd say go ahead and mark it stable.  I'm looking forward to finally
having ProPolice on the LiveCD's allowing us to bootstrap with it from
the ground up.

--
Matt Rickard
frogger@gentoo.org

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Robin H.Johnson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 589 bytes --]

On Wed, Jul 16, 2003 at 06:50:33AM -0700, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> We'd like to receive comments (the negative ones, especially) for moving
> gcc-3.2.3-r1, glibc-2.3.2-r1 and binutils-2.14.90.0.2 from ~arch to arch (at least for x86 platform).
I'm all in favour of it, as it resolves this bug:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16707

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
E-Mail     : robbat2@orbis-terrarum.net
Home Page  : http://www.orbis-terrarum.net/?l=people.robbat2
ICQ#       : 30269588 or 41961639
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Peter Ruskin]

On Wednesday 16 Jul 2003 23:20, Alex Veber wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 July 2003 18:23, Peter Ruskin wrote:
>
> NPTL (Native Posix Threading Library) is the new threading library to
> replace the old and non standard LinuxThreads, NPTL is faster and can
> scale allot better. to use it you need a recent (>2.5.45 IIRC kernel)
> and glibc 2.3.2 (set USE="nptl"). please note its not 100% stable and
> the version in portage is pretty old.
>
Thanks for that Alex

Peter
-- 
==================================================
Gentoo Linux:	Gentoo Base System version 1.4.3.8p1
kernel-2.4.22_pre2-gss i686 AMD Athlon(tm) XP 1600+
==================================================


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Alex Veber]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday 16 July 2003 18:23, Peter Ruskin wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 Jul 2003 19:11, Alex Veber wrote:
> > On Wednesday 16 July 2003 14:54, Brad Laue wrote:
> > > Peter Ruskin wrote:
> > > > Will the others work if I stick with glibc-2.3.1?  I use winex
> > > > and it won't work with 2.3.2.
> > >
> > > You sure? I thought it was just a matter of not working with 2.3.2
> > > if NPTL was enabled (it won't be by default).
> >
> > wine works with all versions of glibc, NPTL or not.
> > winex only works WITH NPTL, not without.
>
> Well, that's good news Alex.  I never heard of NPTL so I did a search
> of portage and a grep of /usr/src/linux/.config and came up with...
> nothing.  Care to educate me a little?

NPTL (Native Posix Threading Library) is the new threading library to replace 
the old and non standard LinuxThreads, NPTL is faster and can scale allot 
better. to use it you need a recent (>2.5.45 IIRC kernel) and glibc 2.3.2 
(set USE="nptl"). please note its not 100% stable and the version in portage 
is pretty old.

>
> Peter

- -- 
Alex Veber
Developer
Gentoo Linux

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/Fc+n0Q5UUdinJT4RAlhmAKCxyf2eqPFDDoiWMibkX+9eEptQbACff83l
VI/TOKdvnHg4MnpIFoCjZHM=
=O3Oe
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Peter Ruskin]

On Wednesday 16 Jul 2003 15:19, Peter Ruskin wrote:
> On Wednesday 16 Jul 2003 14:50, Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > We'd like to receive comments (the negative ones, especially) for
> > moving gcc-3.2.3-r1, glibc-2.3.2-r1 and binutils-2.14.90.0.2 from
> > ~arch to arch (at least for x86 platform).
> >
> > Thanks,
>
> Will the others work if I stick with glibc-2.3.1?  I use winex and it
> won't work with 2.3.2.
>
Now that I know that winex *will* work with NPTL, I'll still stick with
glibc-2.3.1, because NPTL needs >2.5.45 kernel and I can't use Win4Lin
with anything but a few current kernels.

Sorry for being a stick-in-the-mud but I'm comfortable with running 
Gentoo and winex and Win4Lin.  So if gcc-3.2.3-r1 and 
binutils-2.14.90.0.2 can't co-exist with glibc-2.3.1 I'll have to add 
them to /etc/portage/profiles/package.mask.

Peter
-- 
==================================================
Gentoo Linux:	Gentoo Base System version 1.4.3.8p1
kernel-2.4.22_pre2-gss i686 AMD Athlon(tm) XP 1600+
==================================================


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Brad Laue]

Peter Ruskin wrote:
> Sorry for being a stick-in-the-mud but I'm comfortable with running 
> Gentoo and winex and Win4Lin.  So if gcc-3.2.3-r1 and 
> binutils-2.14.90.0.2 can't co-exist with glibc-2.3.1 I'll have to add 
> them to /etc/portage/profiles/package.mask.

glibc will work perfectly well without NPTL enabled, it's an option 
invoked with the nptl USE flag. I'm using glibc 2.3.2 with kernel 2.4.20 
and having no trouble - I don't see win4lin having any trouble with this 
either.

Brad


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Brad Laue]

Robin H.Johnson wrote:
> I'm all in favour of it, as it resolves this bug:
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=16707
> 

glibc 2.3.1 has some documented upstream bugs that 2.3.2 also solves - 
an example is at

http://www.openoffice.org/project/www/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=10210

referenced by

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=24085

Cheers,
Brad


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Peter Ruskin]

On Thursday 17 Jul 2003 00:46, Brad Laue wrote:
> Peter Ruskin wrote:
> > Sorry for being a stick-in-the-mud but I'm comfortable with running
> > Gentoo and winex and Win4Lin.  So if gcc-3.2.3-r1 and
> > binutils-2.14.90.0.2 can't co-exist with glibc-2.3.1 I'll have to
> > add them to /etc/portage/profiles/package.mask.
>
> glibc will work perfectly well without NPTL enabled, it's an option
> invoked with the nptl USE flag. I'm using glibc 2.3.2 with kernel
> 2.4.20 and having no trouble - I don't see win4lin having any trouble
> with this either.
>
Yes, win4lin doesn't have problems with that combination: winex does.

Win4Lin won't work yet with the later kernels that would allow NPTL and 
therefor winex.

Peter
-- 
==================================================
Gentoo Linux:	Gentoo Base System version 1.4.3.8p1
kernel-2.4.22_pre2-gss i686 AMD Athlon(tm) XP 1600+
==================================================


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Brad Laue]

Peter Ruskin wrote:
> Yes, win4lin doesn't have problems with that combination: winex does.
> 
> Win4Lin won't work yet with the later kernels that would allow NPTL and 
> therefor winex.

Logic dictates that if WineX only worked with systems running NPTL 
enabled glibc, and the only kernel capable of supporting it is highly 
experimental, it wouldn't sell many copies at all.

I've used WineX with four versions of glibc, none of which were using a 
2.5 kernel, nor did they have NPTL enabled.

It'll be fine - trust me I'm a lawyer ;)

Brad


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[William M. Brack]

> It'll be fine - trust me I'm a lawyer ;)
>
> Brad

That's an oxymoron if there ever was one

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable

[Eric Sammer]

Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> We'd like to receive comments (the negative ones, especially) for
> moving gcc-3.2.3-r1, glibc-2.3.2-r1 and binutils-2.14.90.0.2 from
> ~arch to arch (at least for x86 platform).

These packages are working great for me (i.e. compile other stuff fine) 
on the following servers (heavy production):

ibm e-server x205 (P4 2.xGhz) CFLAGS="-mcpu=pentium3 -O3 -pipe"

amd duron 900mhz CFLAGS="-march=athlon -O3 -ffast-math 
-fomit-frame-pointer -pipe"

P3 600mhz CFLAGS="-mcpu=pentium3 -O3 -pipe"

I also have a few other gentoo servers but they are all "stable."

A few gentoo laptops (assorted hardware including laptops) are ~x86 and 
show no problems. If all goes well, I will soon have at least one Sun 
220R (or maybe a 420) to test on as well (and by "test," I mean "throw 
some client projects on and pray).

;)

-- 
Eric Sammer
eric@ineoconcepts.com
http://www.ineoconcepts.com


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] request for comments: move to stable (way OT)

[Ferris McCormick]

On Thu, 17 Jul 2003, William M. Brack wrote:

> > It'll be fine - trust me I'm a lawyer ;)
> >
> > Brad
> 
> That's an oxymoron if there ever was one
> 
What?! It works for me!  (The lawyer part.  I have no comment on
"move to stable.") (Hint: The P44646 is licensing information.)

Sorry.  I couldn't resist.
Regards,
--
Ferris McCormick (P44646, MI) <fmccor@inforead.com>
Phone: (703) 392-0303
Fax:   (703) 392-0401


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list