Re: revised proposed solution (was Re: Bug#15859: libc6 in stable is horribly broken)
On Sat, 13 Dec 1997, David Engel wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 13, 1997 at 11:47:50AM -0500, Scott K. Ellis wrote:
> > On Sat, 13 Dec 1997, Remco Blaakmeer wrote:
> > > hamm: libc5-altdev, depends on hamm-libc5,
>
> OK.
>
> > > conflicts with bo-libc5-dev and
> > > hamm-libc6-dev,
>
> Unnecessary.
>
> > > provides (probably) libc5-dev
>
> Definitely not! libc5-dev implies that libc5 is the default
> compilation environment installed in /usr/include.
Sorry, I must have been half asleep when I wrote the above. libc5-altdev
doesn't have to conflict with either libc6-dev or libc5-dev because it is
designed to live together with them.
But if a non-conflicting libc6-dev and libc5-dev were installed, which
would be the default? If I would write a simple 'hello world' program and
type
$ gcc hello.c -o hello
then which libc would 'hello' be compiled against?
Remco
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-request@lists.debian.org .
Trouble? e-mail to templin@bucknell.edu .
Reply to: