#51 closed defect (fixed)
explain what all the patches are used for
| Reported by: | Owned by: | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Priority: | normal | Milestone: | |
| Component: | Book | Version: | 3.0-pre3 |
| Severity: | normal | Keywords: | |
| Cc: |
Description
I thought this was added to Bugzilla. Perhaps it was in Keystone and I forgot to move it to Bugzilla, or it's part of another bug, which isn't a good thing anyways, so here's the stand-alone bug version ;)
(ps: i hope i'm not adding yet another duplicate bug. I seem to be doing that a lot lately)
Change History (8)
comment:1 by , 23 years ago
| Owner: | changed from to |
|---|---|
| Status: | new → assigned |
comment:2 by , 23 years ago
comment:3 by , 23 years ago
I've done the explanations for the patches for gcc, texinfo, man and ncurses though I may change the wording tomorrow when I wake up!
This leaves the ones for findutils, gzip, sh-utils and shadow to do. These ones change function names from function to function2. I assume this is to avoid conflicts but I'll have to investigate further to find out why and when they're needed. If the author is reading (I don't know who made them) you could save me the effort by putting the details into bugzilla or emailing them to me :-) I'll try and do these tomorrow.
comment:4 by , 23 years ago
you're in luck, i'm the 'author' of all the patches except the shadow one, I'll get you those details tomorrow.
Btw, if the patch is in chapter 5 it has only one function: to fix a variable 'colission' with static linking when a particular Glibc version is in use (or to fix a gcc-3 problem with texinfo one). In gzip's case this is glibc-2.0, the other ones are glibc-2.1.x, but not every glibc-2.1 system. Just the ones where the distribution has patched glibc a bit which then breaks static linking a wee bit.
With findutils it's just a bug The patch was there since we've been using glibc-2.0 with gcc-2.7.2.3 and the bug is still there (Well findutils hasn't been updated since LFS started so that explains it). What it basically does is fix bad syntax.
This is as far as my memory goes I'll have a take a look at the patches to see again what I did there and see if I forgot anything.
comment:6 by , 23 years ago
Hmm. I'm not sure about the shadow patch. I think it's just to fix a bug in useradd about checking if the group exists and printing an error message if the user tries to re-create one that does by accident. That's my reading of the code anyways.
comment:7 by , 23 years ago
HIghoS has just told me on #lfs that's its for a compilation problem. Oh well, my C is obviously worse than I thought :-)
comment:8 by , 23 years ago
| Resolution: | → fixed |
|---|---|
| Status: | assigned → closed |
Right. I've added explanations. I'm sure that when you lot read them I'll get wrong for having at least one wrong... I think most are ok though.
I'd like to see added what exactly the patches fix and which platforms are affected. The ones I know by head: gzip fixes that re_max_failures problem on glibc-2.0 systems
texinfo+gcc patches fix compile problems on gcc-3.0 systems
well i should provide more details but this is all I know by head. See if you can figure out the patches on your own. If not, well you know where to find us, right Mark ;)