Scott Johnson writes: > > > >Which no one else saw. It would be a lot more clear if that had gone > >to the BTS. All I saw was a suggestion to try something and a reply > >complaining about how no one was helping you. > > I received the message about replying to [EMAIL PROTECTED] after I got > the initial reply from Matthias. I didn't mean to imply that nobody was > helping me. My message was in reply to the closure and that I felt that it > wasn't actually in that state. Matthias obviously replied VERY fast.. even > fast enough to beat the message from BTS.
returned home. well, I closed the report because it looks like a very common installation problem. > >What are the versions on libc6, libc6-dev, g++ (if already installed), > >libstdc++*, libstdc++*-dev (if already installed), gcc, gcc-3.0, gcc-2.95 > >and gcc-3.0-base? > > ns1:/etc/apt# dpkg -s libc6 | grep ^Version > Version: 2.2.3-6 > ns1:/etc/apt# dpkg -s gcc | grep ^Version > Version: 1:2.95.2-13 > libstdc++2.10-dev (as reported by apt-get.. I can't seem to find it) - where did you find libc6-2.2.3-6 in the stable/potato dist? - why isn't libstdc++2.10-dev 2.95.[34] found? This doesn't look like a standard installation. IMO if you already have glibc-2.2, you should upgrade to testing.
