[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: libc6-2.1.1 ... safe to install?



i run potato with glib6-2.1.1 and kernel 2.2.7. and i have no problems to
speak of, although i did with the first release of potato. i also haven't
noticed any significant problems with any packages. if you want an opinion,
here's mine: my system is much faster, more useful, and just as stable now
as it was when i was using slink. in fact, i daresay i have LESS problems
with it since i can do what i want to do without having to upgrade a zillion
things to accomplish this.

 cheers!
--add


---------------
I got sucked into /dev/null
----------------

----- Original Message -----
From: Sean <snmjohnson@iclub.org>
To: <debian-user@lists.debian.org>
Cc: Debian List <debian-user@lists.debian.org>
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 1999 11:07 AM
Subject: Re: libc6-2.1.1 ... safe to install?


> This kind of strikes at something I've been wondering of late.  Slink,
> back when Hamm was the stable dist, was pretty stable I thought.  I
> realize that Potato started out hideously broken, mostly because of the
> libc6 2.1.1, but that was a while back, and I'm now wondering if anyone
> has any comments on how "stable" the unstable distribution is in
> general.
>
> Sean
>
>
> J Horacio MG wrote:
> >
> > ~> > I have some packages which require version 2.1.1 from libc6 (which
I
> > ~> > expect it can be found in potato).  My question is, do I have to
expect
> > ~> > any problems if I install it in slink, or is it just as straight
forward
> > ~> > as upgrading any other package?
> > ~>
> > ~> If you upgrade a slink installation to libc6 2.1.1, you will probably
have
> > ~> some problems.  I know I did, and I went back to libc6 2.07
> > ~>
> > ~> I suppose you could upgrade to potato and avoid the problems.
> > ~>
> > ~> If you try it on a slink system, do not go back from the potato
version of
> > ~> ld.so to the slink version or you will break the system; I just kept
the newer
> > ~> ld.so when I went back to the older libc6.
> >
> > That sounds as if upgrading to libc6 2.1.1 is not a good idea, at least
> > not if it's just for a couple of packages.  But, does it mean libc6
> > 2.1.1 is not stable, or it means it's stable but not fit to use with a
> > system packed with (and for) a previous version?
> >
> > If I finally decided to do an upgrade, which other packages/libraries
> > should I also upgrade for sanity sake?
> >
> > TIA
> >
> > Horacio
> >
> > --
> > Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe debian-user-request@lists.debian.org <
/dev/null
>
> --
> He who hesitates is last.
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe debian-user-request@lists.debian.org <
/dev/null
>
>


Reply to: