On Thu, 2 Oct 1997, Davide Barbieri wrote:
> I think it is clear that none of us can work on glibc right now.
> So we are stick here, with a semi-broken glibc.
Yes, the current glibc we have is pretty old... I'm trying to
compile last versions, but still with no luck. Is anybody else
working on this?
> I am pretty sure, that there will not be a glibc 2.0 for
> sparc linux.
Right.
> Hopefully RedHat guys are working on glibc 2.1 sources
> to get a stable glibc for sparc/linux, right? But they cannot made
> public release of glibc sources for sparc, until it is stable
> (this is what I guess from redhat sparc mailing list).
Hmmm... who? where? I've only seen one single message
regarding glibc in the redhat sparc list, in which Donnie Barnes
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> says he "will likely be playing with 2.1 very soon".
Have I missed anything?
> We cannot upload packages compiled with libc5, and we cannot
> upload packages compiled with this broken glibc.
Well, IMHO, Sparc packages compiled with libc5 should still
be welcomed.
> So what are we going to do? Wait?
Why don't we try to build a newer glibc? I don't think it's
so hard... but it requires at least 200 Mb of free disk space and a
lot of time (about 30 hours on a SparcStation ELC).
--
Juan Cespedes
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
