Ludovic Courtès writes: > Hi! > > Chris Marusich skribis: > >> As an aside, when do we remove old versions of glibc? > > Good question. I’d say it’s enough to keep 3 versions in total. > Currently the main (only?) use case for these is when computing locale > data via the ‘locale-libcs’ field of operating system definitions. > > Thoughts? 3 seems fine to me. I suppose if they are particularly important for some reason, an old version could be moved to the Guix-Past channel, but I guess in most cases we would just remove them and move forward. >> From ef169adea6f9ca971e22845b839511b015cbc76c Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: Chris Marusich >> Date: Sat, 10 Jul 2021 16:49:49 -0700 >> Subject: [PATCH] gnu: glibc-2.31: Restore patches. >> >> Commit 87961fc965b96ac0c7a5909ac2faab2d023b5339 inadvertently modified the >> patch set for glibc-2.31. This change restores the original patch set. >> >> Fixes: . >> >> * gnu/packages/base.scm (glibc-2.31) [source]: Use the same patches as glibc, >> but replace glibc-hurd-clock_gettime_monotonic.patch with >> glibc-2.31-hurd-clock_gettime_monotonic.patch, and add >> glibc-hurd-signal-sa-siginfo.patch. >> * gnu/packages/patches/glibc-2.31-hurd-clock_gettime_monotonic.patch: Add it. >> * gnu/packages/patches/glibc-hurd-signal-sa-siginfo.patch: Add it. >> * gnu/local.mk (dist_patch_DATA): Adjust accordingly. > > LGTM, thanks! > > Ludo’. Thank you for taking a look! I've committed this in 93a5e89008af440655527d03d62d4726683a89ac. I'll close this report now. -- Chris