[Buildroot] [PATCH v2 2/2] package/localedef: bump to version 2.34-9-g9acab0bba6a5a57323b1f94bf95b21618a9e5aa4
Petr Vorel
petr.vorel at gmail.com
Thu Aug 26 22:47:05 UTC 2021
Hi Arnout, all,
> On 22/08/2021 21:22, Petr Vorel wrote:
> > Hi Romain,
> >> Hello Petr,
> >> Le 22/08/2021 à 21:02, Petr Vorel a écrit :
> >>> resync the version with glibc package.
> >>> Dropped 2 patches (fixes backported from previous releases),
> >>> rebased 2 which are kept (only line numbers changed).
> >>> Suggested-by: Romain Naour <romain.naour at gmail.com>
> >>> Signed-off-by: Petr Vorel <petr.vorel at gmail.com>
> >> Thanks for this new version.
> >> But it will conflict with my patch that resync the glibc version for 2.33
> Resolving those conflicts isn't too difficult, so don't worry about it.
> Well, actually, the "refresh" of the patches *does* make it a bit difficult.
> It's nicer for us if you leave patches untouched as long as they still apply
> correctly.
> >> http://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/buildroot/patch/20210821131256.1138002-1-romain.naour@gmail.com/
> > OK, I'll rebase it once your commit gets merged.
> > But if bump considered safe, maybe my commits could be taken as it is.
> That's what I did :-)
Thanks!
> >> Since glibc and localedef are really the same project, I would suggest to bump
> >> the version with one commit.
> >> I agree, It's not convenient to take care of localedef package at the same time
> >> of glibc.
> > I was thinking about it as well, but when packages are independent it's IMHO
> > slightly better to split it.
> I don't care much either way - there are arguments for both options. localedef
> and glibc aren't tied that strictly, it's just that glibc changes may result in
> different output of localedef, which you won't notice until you actually use
> those locales at runtime (and then only if you used the changed aspect of it).
> So it's more a just-to-be-safe thing.
Thanks a lot for info.
Kind regards,
Petr
> Regards,
> Arnout
More information about the buildroot
mailing list