From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail02.haj.ipfire.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by mail02.haj.ipfire.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4jCqJl0GT2z2xm3 for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2026 10:15:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail01.ipfire.org (mail01.haj.ipfire.org [IPv6:2001:678:b28::25]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature ECDSA (secp384r1 raw public key) server-digest SHA384 client-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "mail01.haj.ipfire.org", Issuer "YR1" (not verified)) by mail02.haj.ipfire.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4jCqJg4QFfz2xNx for ; Mon, 26 Oct 2026 10:15:47 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange x25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail01.ipfire.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4jCqJY5Z49z2LH; Mon, 26 Oct 2026 10:15:41 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=ed25519-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ipfire.org; s=202003ed25519; t=1793009742; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ML8WFGcldRsv4gjS0pBbKzpJWwoy2oICUuGjXQHJKck=; b=0TSUl6iqZJRlpdssPfX1LhiyUzIAN9imbqtF89+0yG1qnwL1IEUE+mENoFHRZaSVALewMB ZOO6da0leY8hUSDA== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=ipfire.org; s=202003rsa; t=1793009742; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=ML8WFGcldRsv4gjS0pBbKzpJWwoy2oICUuGjXQHJKck=; b=gMCKSumjhXLtgCM8AbX9S6IfzhPIHCz/Y5oFiC4kpB9BCnyZcfx4flVLs6a1N8PMym/i5b i8mNEbjRkvraRkUsNDPOEwkcpmSUFbiBX6o9Q4sRsta3lmFIRBQ14hwbjUHBslRkk8Tp9X +z6Q24USF/lCLY6MNRotJF1g7seQqvdkFuGTRrJWKtR+XiXY76w/4FvT/kUtT0XoVte34a wnU72P682IrGZgO9aQu8D4q4TzjmLLSJUt/fVMKIQ3j2lu04EHk7lTPp8BFNtHJrKn0doi rbgogbJxbstSG/xcdfaclYIjNYkzqTsQqzTcREjzSfbR6ypNyU4/S5RLxv+q7g== Message-ID: <3a2c9527-c28f-4496-a067-a9b61a247c2d@ipfire.org> Date: Mon, 26 Oct 2026 11:15:38 +0100 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Subscribe: , List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: Sender: Mail-Followup-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: =?UTF-8?Q?Re=3A_dracut-ng_fix_for_glibc_2=2E44_fts_regression_?= =?UTF-8?Q?=E2=80=94_LoongArch_build?= To: Vincent Li References: Content-Language: en-GB Cc: "IPFire: Development-List" , Michael Tremer From: Adolf Belka In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Hi Vincent, I think the best thing is to implement the updated dracut. I had missed the updates of this package and I note that dracut-ng-112 includes security fixes. So I will issue an update for it and also add it to my nvchecker list so I get informed when new versions are issued. Regards, Adolf. On 26/10/2026 03:47, Vincent Li wrote: > > Hi Michael, > > Sorry, I deleted the email about the potential glibc 2.44 regression https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34861, so I'm starting a new thread. > > From https://sourceware.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34078, I confirmed that my LoongArch build environment needs the fix from https://github.com/dracut-ng/dracut-ng/pull/2394 to work around the glibc 2.44 issue. dracut-ng 112 already includes the fix. > > Do you think it's a good idea to carry the dracut-ng fix in the IPFire build for LoongArch, even though the IPFire build environment doesn't currently experience this issue? > > Best, > Vincent