Re: hppa nptl switch
On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Carlos O'Donell<email@example.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 1, 2009 at 2:08 AM, Aurelien Jarno<firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Frans Pop a écrit :
>>> Carlos O'Donell wrote:
>>>>> In practice it shouldn't be problem at all.
>>>>> Debian should make sure that binary/library compiled
>>>>> against NPTL-hppa-glibc will require NPTL-hppa-glibc
>>>>> by proper Depends: line like "libc6 (>= 2.10)".
>>>> Does every package have to do this? I'm not very familiar with all the
>>>> packaging requirements.
>>> It is something that should automatically get done correctly as long as
>>> the libc-dev package defines the minimum version that way.
>>> The mechanism that determines this is in /var/lib/dpkg/info/libc6.shlibs.
>>> Currently this has lines like:
>>> libc 6 libc6 (>= 2.9)
>> No, as glibc uses symbols files, this file is actually not used.
>> Nevertheless it is still possible to resolve all symbols to libc6 (>= 2.10).
> Once an application is rebuilt against a new libc, what prevents the
> user from downgrading libc and breaking the application?
I'd say "common sense" but I recall we don't have protection against