Re: The fate of libc5
Raj Manandhar wrote:
> libc5 is unfortunately used by a significant minority of commercial
> packages. For example, at various times the libc6 netscape was
> unusable but libc5 was OK (it's what I'm running now; haven't checked
> back to see if the libc6 version runs better).
> To help users, one shouldn't focus on supporting the last 3 (or
> whatever number) of Debian distributions, but rather focus on
> supporting the last 2 major library revs. If libraries disappear (or
That still cuts out libc5 (glibc2.1, remember)?
> are unsupported), then that prevents one from running applications,
> which could be commercial, or just old locally developed things that
> one doesn't want to trouble with recompiling or upgrading. Supporting
> a few library revs also makes Debian that much less of a moving target
> as a platform for vendors -- as one poster pointed out, they would
> then feel less obliged to supply static binaries.
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to email@example.com
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org