Re: Misleading info given by glibcbug

[Horst von Brand <vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl>]

Andreas Jaeger <aj@arthur.rhein-neckar.de> said:
> Horst von Brand's message of "Sat, 26 Sep 1998 21:25:40 -0400":
> >>>>> Horst von Brand writes:

[...]

> >> Description:
>  > 	The above environment information is all wrong: I didn't build
>  > 	glibc-2.0.95 just now, but when it came out :-)
> What is wrong? Compiler version, kernel headers, system, architecture
> and machine are wrong (from glibcbug runtime not from configure time)
> - but the rest should be ok.  Or did I miss something?

Maybe I should have been more precise. My fault.

[...]

> It might be possible to add compiler version, kernel headers and uname 
> at configure time - and additionally uname and compiler version at 
> glibcbug run time.

I'd add kernel headers and uname at run time too.  Too much info should't
hurt (unless you overdo it, as always).

> Anybody volunteering to enhance glibcbug?

Is glibcbug just generated on the fly for glibc or are there other packages
around doing similar stuff? If so, they should all be fixed. Does the exact
format of the message matter (gnats, perhaps)?

> Do you really think using glibcbug-$(version) will help?  I don't see
> the necessity for it.

What if you have several glibc's lying around? You might keep 2.0.7 around
for insurance/crosschecking until you are satisfied with 2.0.96. But then
you might find a critical bug in 2.0.7 later...
-- 
Horst von Brand                             vonbrand@sleipnir.valparaiso.cl
Casilla 9G, Viņa del Mar, Chile                               +56 32 672616