Re: Soft freeze for the glibc-2.44 release

"Andreas K. Huettel" <[email protected]> Mon, 13 Jul 2026 22:46:46 +0900
Newsgroups	gmane.comp.lib.glibc.alpha
Organization	Gentoo Linux
Message-ID	<[email protected]>
Am Montag, 13. Juli 2026, 21:23:36 Japanische Normalzeit schrieb Adhemerval Zanella Netto:
> 
> On 22/06/26 11:09, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> > Dear all, 
> > 
> > as of two days ago we're in the soft freeze phase for the upcoming glibc-2.44 release.
> > 
> > * No *starting* of new features for 2.44 anymore
> > * Decisions on what of the ongoing work goes still into 2.44 and what not
> > * Review and addition of patches 
> > 
> > Please respond with your requests which features or fixes should still go in, 
> > and/or add them to the wiki page under blockers or desirables (unless they are
> > already listed there):
> > https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Release/2.44#Planning
> > 
> > Thanks a lot!
> > Andreas
> > 
> > ******
> > 20 June 2026: Soft freeze
> >     No *starting* of new features anymore
> >     Decisions on what goes still in and what goes not
> >     Review and addition of patches 
> > 
> > 4 July 2026: Freeze
> >     Machine testing
> >     Bug fixes without large impact
> >     No ABI changes without RM discussion
> >     High risk bug fixes should be discussed on the list. 
> > 
> > 18 July 2026: Hard freeze
> >     Only critically important or technically straightforward bug fixes
> >     Release can happen when things are ready 
> > 
> > 1 Aug 2026 (or ideally a bit earlier): Release 
> > ******
> > 
> 
> Hi Andreas,
> 
> There some patches in my backlog that I would like to install for 2.44:
> 
> [1] https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/glibc/patch/[email protected]/
> [2] https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/glibc/patch/[email protected]/
> [3] https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/glibc/list/?series=63231
> [4] https://patchwork.sourceware.org/project/glibc/list/?series=63249
> 
> The [1] only affects the benchtests so it should safe, the [2] only affects
> sparc and fix a long-standing issue.  The [3] is just a new definition from
> newer kernels, not strictly required but is a missing spot to the v7.1
> sync.
> 
> The [4] is the system-wide tunables fix already, they are already R-B
> by DJ.

Sure, no problem as discussed these all make sense.

We can technically just add them to the desirables, plus also the s390x test fix.

> 


-- 
PD Dr. Andreas K. Hüttel
[email protected]
Gentoo Linux developer 
(council, comrel, toolchain, base-system, perl, libreoffice)
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/User:Dilfridge
signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 870 B)