Re: sysvinit and hurd
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> Currently libc0.1 is the official glibc version for the hurd in the
> main archive.
>
> I suggest that you do your research a bit better; or maybe the Debian
> GNU/*BSD people should make it clearer, the naming of the package
> isn't exactly wonderful. libc0.1 is a Debian GNU/*BSD package, it
> isn't even available on Debian GNU/Hurd. Debian GNU/Hurd uses libc0.3
> since ~2000, before it used libc0.2, and before _that_ Debian GNU/Hurd
> didn't exist.
Well, he may be a little but confused, but not completely confused.
(In his message, he mentions libc0.3 and libc0.1, not just libc0.1).
IMHO, I think it is highly desirable that all packages in ftp.debian.org
depend on packages in ftp.debian.org. There is at least one important
package in ftp.debian.org which depends on the libc0.3 in ftp.gnuab.org,
which is newer. I think that should *not* happen. It would be like a
package in unstable depending on a development library in experimental.
Miquel, could you please briefly explain what kind of features in the
new libc do you need, and what kind of breakage would happen when
using the old libc?
Isn't it a little bit strange that the usual shlibdeps mechanism is
not used here and you have to hardcode the dependencies?
Can you check for the required features using some sort of configure
script and refuse to build if the libc is not good enough?
It is not elegant to hardcode dependencies on libc at all. To do it
right, the source package should not need to be changed if the Hurd
moves from libc0.3 to libc0.4, for example.
Reply to: