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

Re: The fate of libc5

On Mon, 10 Jul 2000, Ben Collins wrote:
> Anyone else agree, or can give a real reason why this shouldn't be the
> case?

For my own part, I am sometimes using MapleVR3 (which requires me to
install libc4!) and MapleVR4 (wich needs libc5-compat).  Every new version
of Maple breaks an awful lot of existing software and our folks here doing
symbolic manipulation really do depend on those old versions.  Porting
20loc of code somebody else has written to the new version is no fun.

If it is not a serious problem I vote for leaving it in woody and remove
it later.

BTW: has anybody noticed that because of the frequent libc changes many
commercial applications are *statically* linked on Linux while they are
*dynamic* on other Unices?  This is contraproductive.  (Examples include
Mathematica4 and the ADSM client software.)

Richard B. Kreckel

Reply to: