On Sun, Mar 14, 1999 at 11:36:08PM -0600, Larry 'Daffy' Daffner wrote:
> >>>>> "JC" == Joseph Carter <knghtbrd@debian.org> writes:
> JC> Fair warning WAS given.
>
> Depends on what you consider "fair warning". There was discussion of
> potato containing glibc2.1 but no flag that it was happening, and if
> you're paranoid hold off a bit. It was also stated in the debian-devel
> discussion that the upgrade would not break any binaries compiled with
> glibc2.0, which has shown to be false, and is even documented in the
> FAQ shipped with the new libc package. The breakages so far are
> mostly minor, depending on what's relevant to you. I'm just saying it
> could have been handled more gracefully.
>
> -Larry
People,
Get a grip. This needed to happen, it is best that it did happen early in potato's life. Perl is going to be hard too.
Fair warning WAS given. If you don't think so you need to read -devel a bit more, and maybe IRC a bit. The biggest
casualties seem to be C++ apps. Big deal, we now have a good ammount of time to fix these. And as for you people whining
'cause it glibc-2.1 broke your server, YOU SHOULDN'T BE RUNNING UNSTABLE IF YOU CAN'T HANDLE A BREAKAGE. Joel is doing
a great job and should not be attacked for his work. Let's see YOU do it!
--
__ _
Erick Kinnee | -o) / / (_)__ __ ____ __
Burleson, TX | /\\/ /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ /
mailto:cerb@debian.org | _\_v____/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\
Debian GNU/Linux Developer | http://www.debian.org
Attachment:
pgpAnugIe8_Bd.pgp
Description: PGP signature