I am not sure, if anybody care for this fix, but I just copied libc.so.5
to libc.so.4 when kde was complaining about not finding it. I am not sure
if this should work, but it does work just fine...
On Sat, 25 Nov 2000, David O'Brien wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 25, 2000 at 12:44:34PM -0600, Bill Fumerola wrote:
> > > Huh? Why the worst of both worlds??
> > Incompatible changes AND no way to differentiate between the two. (plus we
> > don't even know what changed it, so we have no way of telling people "your
> > libc before X won't work with binarys that use the frobozz() interface)
> There wasn't an incompatible change. There is too much confusion on
> this issue. There were two things that caused a problem.
> 1. a bug in libc_r such that programs that ran before, crashed.
> 2. a 4.1.1-RELEASE libc.so.4 was being used on a 4.0-RELEASE system.
> #1 just showed off incorrect application code.
> #2 has never been officially supported.
> > People who have binaries they can't recompile will need them. The fact that
> > it pains our CVS tree really isn't an issue to me,
> This is -current, so people should be able to deal with the issue. I'll
> probably put a 4.2-RELEASE libc.so.4 up for people to download and put in
> /usr/lib/compat manually.
> > I'd like to think we have software engineering that utilizes source
> > code management, and not the other way around.
> I would like to think that way too -- but that isn't the truth.
> As I said, I'm willing to commit a compat lib now, but I don't want any
> crap when I update it and the diff is the size of the file itself.
> -- David ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message