Re: libc6
On Tue, 14 Oct 1997, Scott Ellis wrote:
> Someone messed up with the libc5 in the latest stable. It conflicts with
> libc6 for no reason, if you install libc6 with --force-conflicts it should
> work fine.
This isn't strictly speaking true. Libc6 only conflicts with the libc5 in
bo. This is because there is a difference in the format of utmp/wtmp lock
files between the old libc5 and the new libc6. The version of libc5 in
hamm is patched to do the lock file format the same way that libc6 does
them. This seems more than trivial to me since forcing libc6 install will
corrupt utmp/wtmp lock files for one or the other process. Seems to me
this would be good to point out in the HOWTO. There really is a good
reason to upgrade to libc5 in unstable.
> You could also install the latest libc5 from unstable instead
> (better alternative if you intend to upgrade completely to unstable), but
> that is likely to force you down the altgcc/libc5-altdev path if you want
> to be able to compile libc5 stuff.
>
This shouldn't make any difference. Installing libc6-dev will force you
down that path though.
Luck,
Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_-_- _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (904) 656-9769
Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
e-mail: dwarf@polaris.net Tallahassee, FL 32308
_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-user-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: