Re: The fate of libc5
On Tue, Jul 11, 2000 at 05:24:23PM +0200, Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Jul 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
>
> > > If it is not a serious problem I vote for leaving it in woody and remove
> > > it later.
> >
> > Taking it out of woody does not make it unavailable. As with any obsoleted
> > programs/libs, the archive.debian.org repository keeps them around.
>
> And what happens if e.g. a new version of libc6 or perl or anything else
> essential conflicts with libc5? If you have libc5 installed, you have to
> choose between removing libc5 and not upgrading your distribution. This
> can't happen if libc5 is still in the distribution.
We can try to make sure that wont happen. The other alternative is to make
libc5 self contained, and only provide the runtime (no -dev packages, and
no altgcc) in woody. This would require ld-linux.so.1 from ldso me merged
into this package, and ldd and ldconfig dropped (and ldso disappear
completely, since it wont be needed).
This way we don't entice further development with it, at the same time we
still have it around to make sure it is installable.
Ben
--
-----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/ Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \
` bcollins@debian.org -- bcollins@openldap.org -- bcollins@linux.com '
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
Reply to: