begin quoting Tracy R Reed as of Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 12:12:57PM +0700: > Stewart Stremler wrote: > > For some reason, to compile the latest Glibc, you *must* be running a > > 2.6 kernel. Upgrade, or go away. > > Hopefully there is a good reason for it. Have you tried to figure out > what it might be? 2.6 does implement a lot of new features and it has > been quite a while since 2.4 came out. I don't think it is all that > unreasonable that code be built against the latest versions of other > important dependencies. The kernel is pretty important.
I have the 2.6 headers in place. I have a recent version of GCC. I have recent versions of the whole toolchain... Why does it _matter_ what kernel I'm _running_ when I *compile* the library? I'm not trying to _use_ the new glibc. There's something fundamentally wrong when the program being compiled can abort the process because of the system on which it is being compiled. > > -Stewart "Why does this treadmill feel familiar?" Stremler > > You paid a ton of money for your 2.6 kernel and didn't even get the > code? I would contact the FSF and get some legal advice. Free-as-in-beer isn't the issue here. It's the _attitude_. Upgrade, upgrade, upgrade, don't lag too far or you're screwed, sonny! -Stewart "All this activity for so very little real progress" Stremler -- [email protected] http://www.kernel-panic.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/kplug-list
