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

libc6 vs libc6.1

	Why does debian-alpha use `libc6.1' instead of `libc6'?  When
I saw it, I thought it could be because there are two different,
incompatible versions of glibc for Alpha, but I think that is not the

root@salmon:/debian/hamm/hamm/binary-alpha# ls -1 */*libc[0-9]*

	In the `Packages' file, there are 3 packages which depend on
libc6 instead of libc6.1: ldso, libdl1 and (AFAIK, incorrectly) pgp-i.

	But I don't know why should we use that name for the package
instead of just `libc6'.  I suggest moving from `libc6.1' to `libc6',
and make `libc6' provide `libc6.1' until all the packages are

	Well, and other thing:  why is `libc.so.6.1' the soname?  I
also suggest changing the soname with `libc6', and make a symlink from
libc.so.6 to libc.so.6.1 so that all the programs will still work.

	Maybe I'm missing something important here...  feel free to
redirect me to any FAQ if there is one.

Juan Cespedes

TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-alpha-request@lists.debian.org . 
Trouble?  e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .

Reply to: