Re: What is up with glibc in rawhide?

[Tom Lane <tgl redhat com>]

Jesse Keating <jkeating redhat com> writes:
> All glibc.i586 after beta is broken right now, and due to some other
> bugs in play, glibc.i586 was being chosen more often for our build
> chroots than glibc.i686 in glibc builds greater than -12.  We untagged
> -14 before it could be pushed into rawhide so that our buildroots will
> keep working while the glibc folks get a working glibc.i586 package out.
> This should all be fixed up today.

Would you consider reverting glibc to something older than -12?
Frankly, I don't trust anything that's been built since that went
into the buildroots, and the longer it's live the more likely we
are to regret it.

			regards, tom lane