Right, but I'm afraid it may turn out a rather short-term solution in the end. After all it's only (?) a question of linking against right version of glibc.
P. 2009/8/27 Mojca Miklavec <[email protected]>: > On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 13:22, Piotr Kopszak wrote: >> That's right, no one complained till now. Thanks God I never had to >> bother about glibc compatibility but it seems there are ways to build >> backward compatible programs on fresher Debian systems. I don't know >> if it helps but maybe >> >> http://wiki.freegamedev.net/index.php/Portable_binaries > > I don't know how to intepret their text (I don't have too much time at > the moment either), but quoting them: > > As an example, a binary compiled on a Debian Lenny system with glibc > 2.7 won't run on a Debian Sarge system with glibc 2.3 because the > older glibc version doesn't have all the features found and used when > the binary was compiled on a newer system. A binary compiled on Debian > Sarge will run on Debian Lenny, however, thanks to backwards > compatibility. > > In practice, all this means is that you need to compile your > application in a sufficiently old distribution. Examples of > distributions that have been used successfully for making portable > binaries include old glibc 2.2.5 based Red Hat Linux versions, Debian > Sarge, and Debian Etch. > > Mojca > -- http://okle.pl _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~context Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~context More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
