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

Richard W.M. Jones rjones at
Tue Oct 25 07:32:26 UTC 2011

On Mon, Oct 24, 2011 at 10:46:31AM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Mon, 2011-10-24 at 18:50 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> > Adam Williamson wrote:
> > > We have lots of suggestions. As I've said at least fifty times, it's
> > > pointless going too far with the slapping of band-aids on the current
> > > karma system, because it's fundamentally too simplistic: it's never
> > > going to be perfect and there is a definite point of diminishing returns
> > > if we keep screwing with it.
> > 
> > Right. That's why we need to abolish it.
> Why? How would that make anything better? With the proven tester system,
> one somewhat-broken update got through. Without it, we would have had
> five or six utterly broken glibc updates this F16 cycle. Just check the
> history of submissions to glibc in Bodhi. Given the known attitudes of
> the glibc maintainers, if they were allowed to simply submit all their
> builds directly to stable, they would certainly have done so...and
> broken everyone's systems time and time again.
> I'd say the history of F16 updates to glibc demonstrates the raging
> success of the proventesters system, not its failure.

You snipped the part where Kevin wrote "[...] if the maintainer
demonstrates incompetence at taking these decisions, the offending
maintainer needs to be replaced."  The problem here appears to be a
human one, not something that software is going to fix any time soon.


Richard Jones, Virtualization Group, Red Hat
New in Fedora 11: Fedora Windows cross-compiler. Compile Windows
programs, test, and build Windows installers. Over 70 libraries supprt'd

More information about the devel mailing list