Re: [<warp@whitestar.soark.net>] Bug#27841: apt: apt depends on a missing library
On Thu, Oct 15, 1998 at 09:49:22PM -0700, Ben Gertzfield wrote:
> >>>>> "Dan" == Dan Jacobowitz <drow@false.org> writes:
>
> Dan> See, it's not "Is anyone going to?" or "Do we agree we
> Dan> should?" right now. It's "does anyone but Dan have the time
> Dan> to look at http://master.debian.org/~dan and figure out why
> Dan> the compiled libstdc++2.8 package whose source is there is
> Dan> missing a lot of important symbols". I can't figure it out.
>
> Ben> The source in http://master.debian.org/~dan in the libstdc
> Ben> sir is for 2.9. Could this be the problem?
>
> Dan> I present
> Dan> http://master.debian.org/~dan/libstdc/libstdc++_2.90.29-1.dsc
> Dan> for your enjoyment...
>
> Dan> Notice it says Binary: libstdc++2.8.
>
> Wow. How does 2.90 compile out to become 2.8?
The same way egcs 1.1b becomes gcc 2.91.53. The one is an interface
number and the other an internal version.
Dan
Reply to: