Re: glibc 2.1 and potato
On Wednesday 3 February 1999, at 19 h 17, the keyboard of Santiago Vila
> Depends: libc6 (>= 2.1)
> Is this good/bad nice/ugly desirable/undesirable?
In my opinion, it should be avoided, IF POSSIBLE (I know that binary
compatibility even without changing the soname is not always realistic).
At the present time, libc6 2.1 is not even in potato. So, every package
recompiled with it should not be uploaded.
In the future, I believe that potato packages should be, IF POSSIBLE,
installable on slink. I do not wish to force users to upgrade their libc6 (an
important move) just to install a package which I compiled on potato
(specially for scientific programs which do not use the libc tricks in depth).