© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
a60fb26
(Get the code!)
Hi Harald,
this would be a backport of [1][2] which I'm fine with in general.
But there are few constraints we need to resolve first - and I get the feeling you are more acquainted binfmt than I am - so I'd ask you to help me a bit.
For the SRU policy [3] to apply this must be a bug fix and not a new feature and I'm not entirely sure on that. Furthermore we need a clear test case that can be verified when backported and in bionic-proposed. And finally I'm not deep enough into binfmt through qemu static, it would be great if you could take a step back and try to think "what could break if we do this and outline that".
To make those statements good and convincing is especially important since the affected shar of the Ubuntu community is rather low to start with.
TL;DR:
could you please add statements here that you'd think your be sufficient for the sections in [4]
- impact (included why it is a fix and not a feature)
- regression potential (not "it will be safe" but "what could go wrong")
- test case (a list of commands that would work in Bionic KVM guest for example)
[1]: https:/
[2]: https:/
[3]: https:/
[4]: https:/