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

Re: glibc recompiling was Re: libc resolver problem solved (criticalbug)

"There is no problem in computer science that cannot be solved
by adding another level of indirection."

In this context "another level of indirection" would seem to 
mean adding a fake target ("dpkg-juju" or something) supplied by 
later library versions.  I wonder, though, if we aren't solving 
the wrong problem.  Yes, there is a particular range of library 
versions involved, but do the dependencies need to mention just 
those specifically?  In other words, maybe there are some library 
versions that would work -- older ones -- but so what?  It's 
simplest to require the newest one, and why not?  (If this is 
just wrong, please e-mail me privately, and let the idea die 

Incidentally, I hope we're going with the 2.1 glibc.  The glibc team's 
political release problems shouldn't prevent us from using the new 
less-buggy library in place of the current hacked-near-to-death 2.0.x

Nathan Myers

Reply to: