From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from xry111.site (xry111.site [IPv6:2001:470:683e::1]) by sourceware.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A3BAC3858C50; Tue, 12 Jul 2022 08:49:31 +0000 (GMT) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 sourceware.org A3BAC3858C50 Received: from [IPv6:240e:358:1190:c100:dc73:854d:832e:2] (unknown [IPv6:240e:358:1190:c100:dc73:854d:832e:2]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (P-256) server-signature ECDSA (P-384) server-digest SHA384) (Client did not present a certificate) (Authenticated sender: xry111@xry111.site) by xry111.site (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C9BD36694B; Tue, 12 Jul 2022 04:49:22 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: Subject: Re: glibc 2.36 - Slushy freeze (3 weeks to release) From: Xi Ruoyao To: Florian Weimer , WANG Xuerui Cc: libc-alpha , caiyinyu , Alan Modra , liuzhensong , binutils@sourceware.org Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2022 16:49:10 +0800 In-Reply-To: <87a69evl8n.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> References: <7aba5486-ac02-2088-221e-513a6892817a@linaro.org> <87a69evl8n.fsf@oldenburg.str.redhat.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable User-Agent: Evolution 3.44.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00, DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID, DKIM_VALID_AU, DKIM_VALID_EF, FROM_SUSPICIOUS_NTLD, LIKELY_SPAM_FROM, PDS_OTHER_BAD_TLD, SPF_HELO_PASS, 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 X-BeenThere: libc-alpha@sourceware.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Libc-alpha mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2022 08:49:32 -0000 On Tue, 2022-07-12 at 09:33 +0200, Florian Weimer via Libc-alpha wrote: > Does it really make sense to add a glibc port now if we are going to > switch to a different ABI two or three releases from now?=C2=A0 I don't > think > so. The Glibc patches under review (and the upstreamed kernel/gcc/binutils code) are already using the new ABI. The "old" ABI was only used by commercial distros for customers who want to use LoongArch platforms before all the open source components are reviewed and upstreamed properly. Old ABI will never be a part of upstream code. Once glibc is upstreamed we will consider the ABI stabilized, and start to encourage people to use upstreamed ABI. (Obviously we can't do it now: we can't just tell people to "rebuild everything per month".) --=20 Xi Ruoyao School of Aerospace Science and Technology, Xidian University