On Wed, 24 Dec 2003, John Gay wrote:
> Thanks for the info. My version of glibc is 2.2.5
Ah yes, that's the version that has the bug. A bit of testing showed
that 2.2.4 is even worse.
> I would have thought with this system being compiled from scratch it'd have a
> more up-to-date glibc than most distro's, but I never checked.
Recent/new glibc (such as with Suse 9.0) is 2.3.2 - 2.2.5 is quite
old (2.2.4 is from the Redhat 7.1 era for example).
> Unfortunately I don't have cvs installed, so I'll wait for the next tarball
> and test from that.
There should be cvs rpms or whatever available (it's also a small
tarball to compile). What is needed at the present time is someone
with the afflicted version(s) of glibc to try the cvs version and
see if the attempted workaround actually works.
The plan was to have the new release candidate available yesterday
but a last minute show-stopper of a bug surfaced. Current plan is
for sometime between Christmas and New Years Day.
> I've also subscribed to the list, since it's a user-only list. I didn't
Welcome.
Cheers,
Steven Schultz
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: IBM Linux Tutorials.
Become an expert in LINUX or just sharpen your skills. Sign up for IBM's
Free Linux Tutorials. Learn everything from the bash shell to sys admin.
Click now! http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=1278&alloc_id=3371&op=click
_______________________________________________
Mjpeg-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mjpeg-users
