On Wed, 3 Oct 2012, jrnieder at gmail dot com wrote:
> Do I understand correctly that this means testing the patch against
> 2.16, 2.15, 2.14, 2.12, and 2.11 and then filing one bug for each
> branch describing the result?
There is no real evidence of 2.14 or 2.12 being alive - no response from
their maintainer when I asked on libc-alpha whether they are alive or dead
- and 2.11 is considered dead
<http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2012-08/msg00557.html>. I don't
think it's worth doing any backports to those three branches.
On Wed, 3 Oct 2012, jrnieder at gmail dot com wrote:
> Do I understand correctly that this means testing the patch against
> 2.16, 2.15, 2.14, 2.12, and 2.11 and then filing one bug for each
> branch describing the result?
There is no real evidence of 2.14 or 2.12 being alive - no response from sourceware. org/ml/ libc-alpha/ 2012-08/ msg00557. html>. I don't
their maintainer when I asked on libc-alpha whether they are alive or dead
- and 2.11 is considered dead
<http://
think it's worth doing any backports to those three branches.