On Wed 24 Dec 2003 00:44, Steven M. Schultz wrote:
> 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 see.
> > 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).
>
Well, it has been a while since I started this build.
> > 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.
>
Since this box is all compiled from sources, there is no rpm or debs. I'm sure
cvs isn't hard to install, it's the configuration I'm worried about. I'll
have a look at installing it so I can test for you.
> 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.
>
And I'll have a look in the new year.
> > I've also subscribed to the list, since it's a user-only list. I didn't
>
> Welcome.
>
Thanks!
Cheers,
John Gay
-------------------------------------------------------
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
