From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 20030 invoked by alias); 18 Feb 2012 15:08:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 20015 invoked by uid 22791); 18 Feb 2012 15:08:13 -0000 X-SWARE-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.8 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,AWL,BAYES_00,TW_JS X-Spam-Check-By: sourceware.org Received: from localhost (HELO sourceware.org) (127.0.0.1) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.43rc1) with ESMTP; Sat, 18 Feb 2012 15:08:02 +0000 From: "jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org" To: glibc-bugs@sources.redhat.com Subject: [Bug faq/333] Do not report build errors in bugzilla! Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 15:08:00 -0000 X-Bugzilla-Reason: CC X-Bugzilla-Type: changed X-Bugzilla-Watch-Reason: None X-Bugzilla-Product: glibc X-Bugzilla-Component: faq X-Bugzilla-Keywords: X-Bugzilla-Severity: normal X-Bugzilla-Who: jsm28 at gcc dot gnu.org X-Bugzilla-Status: REOPENED X-Bugzilla-Priority: P1 X-Bugzilla-Assigned-To: roland at gnu dot org X-Bugzilla-Target-Milestone: --- X-Bugzilla-Changed-Fields: Message-ID: In-Reply-To: References: X-Bugzilla-URL: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/ Auto-Submitted: auto-generated Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" MIME-Version: 1.0 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: 2012-02/txt/msg00194.txt.bz2 http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=333 --- Comment #116 from Joseph Myers 2012-02-18 15:04:12 UTC --- As I said in bug 11878: We're planning to move the glibc FAQ to the wiki. I'd be inclined to say we should also close bug 333 at the same time, and officially say that build bug reports in Bugzilla are fine if they have all the expected information - with an explanation in the FAQ of what is relevant and of known build issues (such as compilers defaulting to i386 rather than more recent x86; trying to build for a ports architecture without the ports add-on; building with certain distribution compilers that default to -fstack-protector; all of these should of course be detected by configure, but the FAQ is the place for longer explanations of how to fix them); the FAQ would also discuss how builds of low-level system libraries such as glibc are intrinsically more complicated than those of almost all other software. But where build failures result from old compilers, linkers etc., I think we should also be more active in increasing the minimum versions required by configure (rather than trying to work around deficiencies in older versions). Roland, Carlos, Ryan - what do you think? See also Andrew Pinski's comment of 2006-08-04. Build failures can have tricky system dependencies, but so can e.g. some concurrency issues reported as NPTL bugs. If we look at reported bugs promptly then we can make sure they have all the relevant information - and if we make configure detect problems with the build environment and give errors early, we can reduce the incidence of duplicate reports for the same environmental problem. -- Configure bugmail: http://sourceware.org/bugzilla/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are on the CC list for the bug.