From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/2926 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: LM Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: musl setup attempt Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 09:36:27 -0400 Message-ID: References: <5140CA2B.2060902@barfooze.de> <20130315141141.1f14e6a4.idunham@lavabit.com> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1363440999 29408 80.91.229.3 (16 Mar 2013 13:36:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2013 13:36:39 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-2927-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sat Mar 16 14:37:05 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UGrIG-00079i-2w for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Sat, 16 Mar 2013 14:37:04 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 5269 invoked by uid 550); 16 Mar 2013 13:36:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 5261 invoked from network); 16 Mar 2013 13:36:38 -0000 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-received:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=7mJ4no4sExLkQ3PxEB74+q6gM9gXBN0NUB5y3Jp65IM=; b=M3LNizXjBCZAtDzgEpBZ8uj9M7lJT3GPx0uiIzjqctyRrnHhDHhlhZtYoCAa0RFVQN Sj8sMbD+AzaKZyHTheLRRnohsO60QvFb/bZgN5RgSUiT4vQjDNam4c/6bJxQm/jetnbB Vygo31gZT/YcR2KnGNp+wydzoo9FrRTy+pmWcWPTJfXv8IG0y67onygriOH2dwCwopYm Vr4K9n2Hf3Ha3TLY4/3E4oGy/0vmBYyUZ7JaPPZ1St6OOaIWHLg3lsc5Fzx09iw56pOM gUxh902VUaDaXg+q0ZD/M5fufBHYp0CjvHUeUElBH9z4ZKXu+JwGs+TuQREUi80TvEn8 gjxw== X-Received: by 10.14.200.137 with SMTP id z9mr28732074een.20.1363440987322; Sat, 16 Mar 2013 06:36:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130315141141.1f14e6a4.idunham@lavabit.com> Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:2926 Archived-At: On 3/15/13, Isaac Dunham wrote: > A few points: > 1) Patches beat bug reports. Make sure that you note upstream policy about > copyright assignments and so on, though. > Also follow the code style upstream uses. > 2) Make sure it's not going to break upstream policy. > Examples: don't change -std=c89 > 3) Make sure it doesn't disable something for other platforms (eg, breaking > tests for uclibc) > 4) Make it as little change as appropriate > 5) If at all possible, test on other platforms. Thanks for the points. It's good to know I'm on the right track. I do all of those things. I do typically provide patches with my bug reports. To me, there's usually no point in saying it's broken if I can't give a fix for it. > The best response I had was a trivial patch for libnl (adding a couple > headers) which I prepared, tested on musl and glibc, then sent with a > comment that it fixed build on musl and worked on glibc. It was applied > almost immediately. I've had lots of patches added to software. I've also had lots of uncomfortable results where the developers were not very polite (and this seems to be happening a lot more often in recent years than it did years ago when I first started doing this). If you know the phrase, one bad apples spoils the whole bunch, well that certainly applies for me. It's made me rather uncomfortable every time I send in a patch now and I often think twice before doing so. I'm not sure if someone's going to want it or if they're going to be nasty about it. I even preface some of my messages now by saying in case you'd like to support this platform, here's what I had to do to get your software to compile successfully on this system. Sincerely, Laura