Re: glibc-compat ???
On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, Robert Varga wrote:
>
>
> On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, Eric Weigel wrote:
>
> >
> > On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 02:42:26AM -0300, Taupter wrote:
> > > > Strange. If i can remember, Slink has libc5 compatibility libs.
> > > > Why not glibc2.0 compatibility libs for potato, as RH-based distros
> > > > have?
> > >
> > > They're both libc 6.0 -- how would ld.so know which one you wanted?
> > > Any apps which run on 6.0 and not 6.1 are broken and should be fixed.
> >
> >
> > Some things changed from 2.0 to 2.1 so that non broken binaries won't
> > work. One I know about is stat, which is now a macro instead of a
> > function call (breaks smbsh, even if you recompile it)
> >
> > Some other software doesn't work either. One I know about is IBM DB2
> > database. I don't know why it doesn't work, it just doesn't, and of
> > course I don't have the source.
> >
> > I've thought about compatibility links, but like you said, they're both
> > libc 6.0.
> >
> > Overall though, there doesn't seem to be a lot of broken stuff.
> >
>
> The other one it breaks is Oracle 8.0, and one needs to convert Redhat
> compatibility libraries to be able install it, and a patch from Oracle.
>
> I have heard it also broke Applixware, but I am not sure.
>
> Robert Varga
Applixware is absolutely ok. I personally run Applixware 4.4.2 on my
home Potato box, on another Potato and a redhat 5.1 at the company,
all of them work without any compat-packages. (Also true for Applixware
5.00M - a pre-release beta)
--andor dirner
--------------------
Free science and free software are just two aspects of the same complex
reality: long-term human survival.
Support humankind, use Linux.
Reply to: