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

Re: Libc5 and libc6 conflict



On Mon, Aug 10, 1998 at 03:05:26PM +0200, Yves Van de Weyer wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I installed Debian Linux 2.0.29 and wanted to add support for ppp.

2.0.29 is NOT a "debian version" it is the version of the Linux
kernel itself. However...if your kernel version is 2.0.29
and you havn't upgraded it on your own...then you are most
probably using debian version 1.3 (AKA "bo")

The current "stable" version is 2.0 (hamm)

> I ran deselect and it refused to install the necessary libc6 library because it was in conflict with the required libc5 library.
> How can I nevertheless install ppp support.

ok...this is somewhat complicated.
libc is one of the single most importnat componants of your system.

It looks like you are trying to install hamm ppp on your bo system.
libc5 and libc6 are incompatible. This is in such a way that libc6 can NOT
be used to run libc5 binary programs and vica versa, however...
it is possible to install BOTH libc5 and libc6 at the same time...but
you need a newer version of libc5.

I would recommend that you get a hamm (2.0) CD and follow the instructions
to upgrade to hamm. (it can be done by hand but...if you screw it up then 
your system will be completely unusable)

If you don't want to do that then....
check out:
http://www.debian.org/2.0/HOWTO.upgrade.html

BTW you said you used dselect...from that web page:

Q: Why not just use dselect's ftp method like normal?
A: It will not order the package installation correctly so
   can't gaurantee a smooth upgrade. Work is being done on APT,
   a new front-end to dpkg. with apt, all future upgrades will
   be easier than ever and not suffer from this type of
   inconveniance


you will be glad you did :) hamm is much more "current" than bo
-Steve
-- 
/* -- Stephen Carpenter <sjc@delphi.com> --- <sjc@debian.org>------------ */
E-mail "Bumper Stickers":
"A FREE America or a Drug-Free America: You can't have both!"
"honk if you Love Linux"


Reply to: