BEWARE: a problematic glibc made it to stable (F16)

Josh Boyer jwboyer at
Fri Oct 21 10:42:04 UTC 2011

On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 1:21 AM, Rahul Sundaram <metherid at> wrote:
>> I'd vote for #1, but that's a much longer conversation that should be
>> had upstream and before we even get close to bringing it to FESCo.
> FESCo is the entity which can have that conversation with Glibc upstream
> on behalf of Fedora.  Who else can?

The Glibc package maintainer.  I'm pretty sure he understands
upstream, and FESCo should probably start the discussion with him
first anyway.


More information about the devel mailing list