From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <SRS0=DPLI=AI=klomp.org=mark@sourceware.org>
Received: from gnu.wildebeest.org (gnu.wildebeest.org [45.83.234.184])
	by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E1A463858C50
	for <buildbot@sourceware.org>; Mon, 17 Apr 2023 12:55:42 +0000 (GMT)
DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.2 sourceware.org E1A463858C50
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=klomp.org
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=klomp.org
Received: from r6.localdomain (82-217-174-174.cable.dynamic.v4.ziggo.nl [82.217.174.174])
	(using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by gnu.wildebeest.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9EE61302BB02;
	Mon, 17 Apr 2023 14:55:41 +0200 (CEST)
Received: by r6.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000)
	id 6301F340083; Mon, 17 Apr 2023 14:55:41 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <baeaf8e303921448badd7c1d90b892391728028f.camel@klomp.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Enable glibc builds on stable release branches
From: Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>
To: Simon Chopin <simon.chopin@canonical.com>, buildbot@sourceware.org
Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2023 14:55:41 +0200
In-Reply-To: <CAOOWow01De4uFbKW9Db-OXXk-YW=EkFZARL0w4z-kK1eeT0s7A@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
	<CAOOWow01De4uFbKW9Db-OXXk-YW=EkFZARL0w4z-kK1eeT0s7A@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
User-Agent: Evolution 3.46.4 (3.46.4-1.fc37) 
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3028.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,JMQ_SPF_NEUTRAL,KAM_DMARC_STATUS,RCVD_IN_BARRACUDACENTRAL,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,TXREP,T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.6
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.6 (2021-04-09) on server2.sourceware.org
List-Id: <buildbot.sourceware.org>

Hi Simon,

On Mon, 2023-04-17 at 13:06 +0200, Simon Chopin wrote:
> The glibc 2.37 release announcement contains an exlicit call for
> distributions to track the stable release branches. In light of this, I
> think it makes sense for those branches to have CI coverage similar to
> the master branch.

Makes sense and looks good. Pushed.

Thanks,

Mark

P.S. It did have some odd whitespace issues, easily resolved, but you
might want to look at why your mailer wraps lines.