From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 8829 invoked by alias); 5 Feb 2010 12:42:07 -0000 Received: (qmail 8772 invoked by uid 48); 5 Feb 2010 12:41:54 -0000 Date: Fri, 05 Feb 2010 12:42:00 -0000 Message-ID: <20100205124154.8771.qmail@sourceware.org> From: "sergstesh at yahoo dot com" To: glibc-bugs@sources.redhat.com In-Reply-To: <20040816203830.333.roland@gnu.org> References: <20040816203830.333.roland@gnu.org> Reply-To: sourceware-bugzilla@sourceware.org Subject: [Bug faq/333] Do not report build errors in bugzilla! X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC Mailing-List: contact glibc-bugs-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: glibc-bugs-owner@sourceware.org X-SW-Source: 2010-02/txt/msg00031.txt.bz2 ------- Additional Comments From sergstesh at yahoo dot com 2010-02-05 12:41 ------- I very carefully consider behavior of those whom I might help. Developers of 'glibc' are absolutely no freaking way such people - because first and foremost they are not ready to admit they have bugs. Regarding "Building glibc properly is a complex operation with many particular dependencies" - let me translate it for you: build documentation is of unbelievably low quality. It was enough for me to discover that having _exactly_ the same settings (i.e. both dependencies and command line options) I can successfully build one 'glibc' version and fail to build another. Yes, I started looking into build code - it does nasty things not documented anywhere. IIRC, it, for example, discards CPPFLAGS, even though 'configure' help message traditionally says the environment variable is supported. -- What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |REOPENED Resolution|WORKSFORME | http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=333 ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug, or are watching someone who is.