Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Update glibc to 2.37 #15309

Closed
wants to merge 4 commits into from
Closed

Update glibc to 2.37 #15309

wants to merge 4 commits into from

Conversation

The-King-of-Toasters
Copy link
Contributor

Closes #12808
Closes #12809
Closes #14798

See also: ziglang/glibc-abi-tool#4.

The "2.33" compat files had to be be manually added back in after
running `update_glibc`. Also manually added was the file
`sysdeps/x86_64/x86-lp_size.h`.
Sourced from the following commits:
- `4a401b20e46d779f41dae3406160265eef2d6e5b`
- `39083c31a550ed80f369f60d35791e98904b8096`
- `7e6aeead85c0831b054f095f35677abb49e9b984`
@BratishkaErik
Copy link
Contributor

IIRC you said that you will jump straight to glibc 2.37, skipping two previous versions. Should we really mark two first issues as resolved then? IMHO they should stay as "not resolved yet"

@The-King-of-Toasters
Copy link
Contributor Author

The process involves copying over all the new sources/headers, so the only benefit would be to bisect any build failures (which I'm probably going to have to do anyway judging by the CI...)

@motiejus
Copy link
Contributor

For the sake of future maintainability please update lib/libc/glibc/README.md with the new commit hashes. Since this will likely be rebased, it's probably OK to do separately though.

Also, I find it easier to apply out-of-tree patches when they are separate commits instead of having a single larger one bundled. Up to you — but consider it.

@motiejus
Copy link
Contributor

motiejus commented May 4, 2023

Also, I find it easier to apply out-of-tree patches when they are separate commits instead of having a single larger one bundled. Up to you — but consider it.

I take it back. With commits like #15573 it would become a mess quickly.

@andrewrk
Copy link
Member

Closing this for multiple reasons:

  • failing CI checks
  • no action in months
  • a core team member must do the glibc update process for security reasons

@andrewrk andrewrk closed this Jun 18, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
4 participants