Re: LSB1.1: /proc/cpuinfo
On Fri, Jan 04, 2002 at 02:03:48AM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Right now, when I am forced to make binary only versions of programs
> like e.g. the the Plextor firmware upgrade program, I can only do it
> for libc.so.5 and for glibc-2.2. Anything in between gives problems.
Why don't you just link your binary-only program statically? If you
do that, then it is entirely irrelevant which libc is installed on the
system, and core kernel backwards compatibility has been quite good,
Yes, there have been some small problems, but most of them have been
device driver specific --- which I know is a sore point for you, since
a number of those problems have been in the scsi sg/cdrom/cd-recorder
space, where you spend a lot of time. (And thank you, by the way,
it's much appreciated!) And when people make (or suggest)
irresponsible changes like that, whether it's non-compatible changes
to device driver bitmaps which are referenced in public API's, or
whether it's in proposing that /proc/cpuinfo should be removed, they
should be spanked.
So if you link statically, your programs will run sanely accross a
much larger part of the Linux installed base, and across a much larger
set of programs than if you link dynamically and hope for the best.
P.S. On a completely unrelated note, while I have you here, how well
do DVD recorders work with Linux these days? Some folks have claimed
that cdreocrd will "just work" --- is that true?