On Jun 30, 2002 at 14:00, Vinay Pai wrote: >Once I got the drivers and other kernel configuration paramaters >right, I had no trouble at all. glibc worked just fine with the new >kernel. My guess is that glibc talks to the kernel through
Yes, kernel upgrades are no problem. >Glibc was another matter. I installed glibc 2.2.3 with the prefix And that's what worries me. >My conclusion, upgrading glibc can break your system totally if you >don't know that you're doing! Exactly. See, almost everything is usually compiled with dynamic library linking i.e. calls are made in your program to functions in gcc. Try compiling a simple helloworld.c using: gcc helloworld.c and gcc --static helloworld.c (I think it's "--static") and note the difference in executable size. The latter includes most of glibc (or at least enough for stdio.h and printf) into your executable. >However there's one thing you should know... the kernel doesn't need >to find glibc while its being compiled... its the other way around. Oh? That's new. >If you also want to upgrade GCC you might want to do it before >glibc... the quality of code produced by the compiler won't depend I have to, the new glibc doesn't settle for gcc less than 2.x (x=95, I think). >However, use kgcc rather than gcc 3.x to compile the kernel. I >remember getting a horribly broken kernel when I compiled it with >3.0.1 (iirc) gcc is either fixed or it's the right way to do it now. Either way, I'll use 3.0.3 or whatever the latest is. -- Satya. <URL:http://satya.virtualave.net/> Once is chance, twice is coincidence, three times is enemy action. _______________________________________________ http://mm.ilug-bom.org.in/mailman/listinfo/linuxers
