glibc: 2.34-210 -> 2.35-163

[lovesegfault]

Description of changes

The patches needed a little work, but other than that it was pretty smooth. I
built hello successfully, but we'll need Hydra to do further checking.

cc. @vcunat

Things done

• Built on platform(s)
  • x86_64-linux
  • aarch64-linux
  • x86_64-darwin
  • aarch64-darwin
• For non-Linux: Is sandbox = true set in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
• Tested, as applicable:
  • NixOS test(s) (look inside nixos/tests)
  • and/or package tests
  • or, for functions and "core" functionality, tests in lib/tests or pkgs/test
  • made sure NixOS tests are linked to the relevant packages
• Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
• Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
• 22.11 Release Notes (or backporting 22.05 Release notes)
  • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
  • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
  • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
  • (Release notes changes) Ran nixos/doc/manual/md-to-db.sh to update generated release notes
• Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

[Ma27]

See also #165979.

[lovesegfault]

Built up to python3 without issues.

[lovesegfault]

Built up to firefox without issues: /nix/store/zln8r9iyxpann0gv9wv8l65s3nchar6m-firefox-102.0.1/

[lovesegfault]

Built up to Chromium: /nix/store/6cmscp0wlssv6mr5zql6lnv5yx4ad6h5-chromium-103.0.5060.134/

[vcunat]

Nit: in the patches of #!/bin/bash, why don't we make that hunk to have no context, so that we don't have to update it every year? The risk of applying it wrongly seems pretty non-existent here.

[trofi]

LGTM! In past few months I built my desktop system with glibc-2.35 a few times and did not notice major API breakages. Should be an easy hydra run (famous last words).

[Ma27]

Yeah, the releases from February are IIRC the less impactful ones :)
Anyways, I'm going to close #165979 now since this is more up-to-date and seems to be working fine.

@lovesegfault just one thing: it would be cool if we could coordinate who takes care of glibc updates in the future to make sure we don't duplicate work :)

[lovesegfault]

Alright, I built all of iso_gnome without issues. I think it's in a good state.

[lovesegfault]

@lovesegfault just one thing: it would be cool if we could coordinate who takes care of glibc updates in the future to make sure we don't duplicate work :)

Definitely, I completely forgot that we had a branch for 2.35 up, so when I hit a need for it yesterday, I decided to just try bumping it.

[ghost]

This bootstraps on powerpc64le-linux with a bootstrap-files rebuilt after #181943. And it looks like it will let us use IEEE-standard long double like Fedora 36 does: #170215.

[vcunat]

Hydra jobset, as requested through matrix: https://hydra.nixos.org/jobset/nixpkgs/pr-182538-glibc-2.35

[lovesegfault]

Okay, the eval isn't fully done, but it's far enough along that I don't think we have any major noticeable issues with this PR.

@Ma27 Do you oppose merging it and letting it cook in staging? Don't want to hit the button without your OK.

[Ma27]

SGTM, thanks!