On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Andrey Vul <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 7:09 PM, Andrey Falko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Paul Hartman > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: > >> > >> I've always been curious about something in emerge --info's output: > >> > >> $ emerge --info > >> Portage 2.2_rc12 (default/linux/amd64/2008.0/desktop, gcc-4.3.2, > >> glibc-2.8_p20080602-r0, 2.6.27-gentoo-r1 x86_64) > >> ================================================================= > >> System uname: > >> > >> Linux-2.6.27-gentoo-r1-x86_64-Intel-R-_Core-TM-2_CPU_6600_@ > _2.40GHz-with-glibc2.2.5 > >> Timestamp of tree: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 00:31:02 +0000 > >> > >> Why does it show the glibc-2.8 on the second line but glibc2.2.5 on the > >> fifth? > >> > >> Thanks, > >> Paul > >> > > > > My best guess is that your kernel was compiled by a toolchain that was > > running on glibc2.2.5 > > > > See what happens if you recompile the kernel under the newer toolchain. > > > 2.6.27 uses glibc? Really? > I'm asking lkml what's happening. > > > -- > Andrey Vul > > A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text. > Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing? > A: Top-posting. > Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail? > > Well it doesn't use glibc per se, gcc uses the glibc.....however, his uname -a output does look funky. Here is mine: System uname: 2.6.24.7 x86_64 Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6700 @ 2.66GHz Did all underscores make it there by accident? What happens when you do a plain uname -a?
