On Thu, Jun 16, 2005 at 12:54:08PM -0500, Ian Murdock wrote: > Daniel Stone wrote: > > libc6 added interfaces between 2.3.2 and 2.3.5 and made several other > > major changes, so all packages built with .5 depend on .5 or above, > > in case you use one of the new interfaces. > > > > A binary built with 2.3.2 can run with .5, but a binary built with .5 > > can't necessarily run with .2. > > Then why not build your packages against 2.3.2? That would ensure > maximum compatibility with Debian proper (which to most of the > world is sarge, *not* sid, so don't answer that you're almost the > same as sid). Hoary (like sarge) is built against 2.3.2. Breezy (like current sid) is built against 2.3.5. > I don't begrudge your attempt to innovate, but I doubt your > users consider a slightly newer libc innovation, particularly when > it introduces problems like this. Ironically, the problem in this case stems from sid innovating too fast for Hoary, the latest stable Ubuntu release. Ho hum. > I strongly suspect they're > more interested in your X.org and GNOME 2.10. Given > that, a lot of this divergence seems pretty gratutious to me. Yes, these are both very interesting to users. Which 'divergence' do you mean when you reference that -- X.Org/GNOME 2.10, or glibc? Cheers, Daniel
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature