Re: Missing ldd? Have libc6 on hold? Get ldso from slink...
>>>>> "CS" == Craig Sanders <cas@taz.net.au> writes:
CS> On Sun, Mar 14, 1999 at 04:57:05PM -0800, Robert Woodcock wrote:
>> The solution is to downgrade the ldso package to the one in
>> slink, or actually take the plunge to glibc 2.1.
CS> so what's likely to break if i upgrade to glibc 2.1? will i
CS> still be left with a (mostly) usable system?
CS> (i'm willing to test it but not if my machine is going to be
CS> die)
Mostly usable, yes. Clean, no. So far, jdk and rvplayer seem to be the
2 victims I've seen. (I've since spent a couple hours downgrading and
holding all the glibc2.1 stuff.). Anyone seen others?
It really would be nice in the future if fair warning was given before
major changes such as this were made that had the potential to break a
wide variety of things, so that people can decide if the risk level is
appropriate for their system. For the most part, unstable has been
relatively safe for a non-critcal system, where it's desired that the
system remain mostly useful. Then a whack on the nose like this comes
along. It would be highly unfortunate if the only testing that
unstable got was on systems that only see use as test systems, but
making a change like this without warning appears to be the first
salvo in making that an unfortunate reality.
-Larry
--
Larry Daffner | Linux: Unleash the workstation in your PC!
vizzie@airmail.net / http://web2.airmail.net/vizzie/
Clarke's Third Law:
Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.
Reply to: