Re: glibc 2.1 and compatibility (Was: slink is gone, goals for potato?
On Wednesday 3 March 1999, at 11 h 39, the keyboard of Andrew Pimlott
<andrew@pimlott.ne.mediaone.net> wrote:
> Debian can provide a useful service by adding new, unsupported
> mini-distributions (one per stable dist) for packages from unstable compiled
> against (past and present) stable systems.
That's what I'll be forced to do, anyway (I "sell" Debian to people by saying
"You are not forced to upgrade to the latest version, you are not forced to
beta-test the products yourself" and these reasons are very convincing for
former Microsoft clients^H^H^H^H^Hvictims) and to distribute the hamm and
slink versions from my own server. So, a common framework would certainly be
useful.
> commands), and only add packages that are reasonably expected to work (have
> lived in unstable for a bit without problems). Both of these criteria
> require judgements, but in practice the answers are usually obvious, and we
Yes, most of the packages I manage (there is nothing "system-level") work the
same wether compiled on hamm or slink.
Reply to: