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

Adam Williamson awilliam at
Mon Oct 24 06:55:06 UTC 2011

On Sun, 2011-10-23 at 23:43 -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sun, 2011-10-23 at 04:14 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > The fact that a glibc with showstoppers of this kind got pushed to stable 
> > shows that the karma system does not work at all. It just hinders getting 
> > legitimate fixes out and does nothing to stop regressions. glibc is even 
> > critpath, yet broken crap still goes out.
> Except...12.999 got pushed out precisely *because* it fixed the most
> critical breakage in 12. I'm sure you've previously argued that
> 'legitimate fixes' should go out even if they break something else, so
> why are you complaining when it happens?

Oh - and remember, the goal of the critpath process is to ensure we
don't send out updates that break people's systems. It worked fine in
this case: no glibc update which breaks systems was approved. All the
ones which caused major runtime breakage got rejected. The only breakage
in one which was approved was to do with compiling things - which, sure,
is a pain in the ass, but it's not the kind of problem critpath was
introduced to deal with in the first place.
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | adamwfedora

More information about the devel mailing list