On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, teunis wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Feb 1998, Thomas G. Lockhart wrote:
>
> > > > JDBC works
> > > > postgres works
> > > > platform : linux (I'm not posting kernel version! it doesn't matter!! :)
> > > > egcs-2.91.06 (gcc-2.8.0 with haifa scheduler + other updates)
> > > > glibc-2.0.5c from RedHat-5.0 distrib - should be stable
> > > > [but with full crypt, locale]
> > > >
> > > > But : Here's output from regression tests:
> > > > Is there anything wrong with the failed tests? (is it known?)
> > >
> > > I get the same regression output. checkresults shows you the problems,
> > > and it mostly error message words or rounding.
> >
> > Hmm. A linux box is used to generate the expected results, so we need to be
> > more careful here. I suspect that you have date/time trouble reported earlier
> > by (Oliver?? can't find the e-mail, sorry). A few of the math functions in
> > glibc2.0.x were misbehaving, leading to troubles like '3 hours 59 minutes 60
> > seconds' rather than '4 hours' in timespan output.
> >
> > That person submitted patches, but they were pretty specific to the glibc2
> > problems. Of course, I've already got some ugly code in there because Solaris
> > had some similar broken math, so perhaps we should figure out how to extract
> > all of the busted code into the port-specific files?
>
> I'll say it again and again - glibc-2.0 is the _STANDARD_ (actually
> reference) platform for Unix. All Unix. Not just Linux.
> Adopted last year.
And...how many Unix (other then Linux) are *actually* using it?
Any idea on how we can test whether it is being used or not?
The "let's break all ports except Linux because the rest don't
follow a new standard" argument just don't hold water for those not using
Linux :)
