Re: GLIBC_2_2_3 ??
On Thu, Apr 12, 2001 at 01:24:32AM +0800, zhaoway wrote:
> Hi,
>
> When tracking unstable, those packages (fileutils, libgtk1.2 etc) are
> installed ok but when be running (like ls) they complained of lacking
> a GLIBC 2_2_3 ... I then noticed the libc6 in unstable is 2.2.2, so my
> question is how these packages got this weird linkage? They're not
> build against unstable? Then how do they get built?
Glibc in unstable follows CVS. So it is actually 2.2.2 and a half. If
they complain about symbols, then it sounds like to me that you have
forced installation against dependencies, because I increase the
shlibdeps correctly.
Ben
--
-----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/ Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \
` bcollins@debian.org -- bcollins@openldap.org -- bcollins@linux.com '
`---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
Reply to: