Re: glibc 2.1 status
- To: email@example.com
- Subject: Re: glibc 2.1 status
- From: Joel Klecker <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 1 Jan 1999 08:05:37 -0800
- Message-id: <email@example.com>
- In-reply-to: <19990101045049.C2331@cs.leidenuniv.nl>
- References: <firstname.lastname@example.org>; from Joel Klecker on Thu, Dec 31, 1998 at 03:46:17PM -0800 <email@example.com>
At 04:50 +0100 1999-01-01, Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Previously Joel Klecker wrote:
My perception was wrong, C++ doesn't break (or at least, not all of it).
Can you be a bit more specific about that? I do allmost all my
development in C++ these days and I would be very annoyed if it would
I had been told by someone who tried an earlier set of packages I had
made that all the C++ code dynamically linked with libstdc++ on their
system broke after the upgrade. This was at odds with the glibc FAQ,
which said the older libstdc++ should continue to work fine.
In fact it does, it is even perfectly possible to continue
development with it (at least, in my limited testing).
There is still a problem though, a glibc 2.1 system won't be able to
build the old libstdc++ with the glibc 2.0 ABI (expressed as
"libstdc++-libc6.0-1.so.2" by the libapi patch to egcs). If one
builds egcs on a glibc 2.1 system, one gets a libstdc++ with the
glibc 2.1 ABI (expressed as "libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2" by the
 Incidentally, no, glibc 2.1 is not libc 6.1 (the only port using
"libc.so.6.1" is alpha, and that includes glibc 2.0), it would be
more correct for the libapi patch to use "glibc2.0" or "glibc2.1",
but it's too late now.
Joel Klecker (aka Espy) <URL:http://web.espy.org/>
Debian GNU/Linux PowerPC -- <URL:http://www.debian.org/ports/powerpc/>