On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 03:28:52PM +0800, martin wrote:
I am trying to install an old library: libstdc++2.9-glibc2.1
When try this
apt-get install libstdc++2.9-glibc2.1
I get the following message:
Package libstdc++2.9-glibc2.1 is not available, but is referred to by
another package
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 04:19:42PM +0100, Matt Kraai wrote:
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 03:28:52PM +0800, martin wrote:
I am trying to install an old library: libstdc++2.9-glibc2.1
[...]
If I follow the links on packages.debian.org website to this link:
http://ftp.wa.au.debian.org/debian
Hi,
I've downloaded the Debian 3.0r1 CDs. I can't find the package
libstdc++2.9-glibc2.1 anymore on the CDs. This package existed in
3.0r0. Can anyone shed a light on this ? I have also checked the list
on http://people.debian.org/~joey/3.0r1/ as was mentioned in the 3.0r1
announcement mail sent
Darko Koruga wrote:
Hi,
I've downloaded the Debian 3.0r1 CDs. I can't find the package
libstdc++2.9-glibc2.1 anymore on the CDs. This package existed in
3.0r0. Can anyone shed a light on this ? I have also checked the list
on http://people.debian.org/~joey/3.0r1/ as was mentioned in the 3.0r1
On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 10:16:15 + Chris Lale wrote:
I've downloaded the Debian 3.0r1 CDs. I can't find the package
libstdc++2.9-glibc2.1 anymore on the CDs. This package existed in
3.0r0. Can anyone shed a light on this ? I have also checked the
list on http://people.debian.org/~joey
On Thu, Jan 16, 2003 at 11:37:21AM +0100, Darko Koruga wrote:
On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 10:16:15 + Chris Lale wrote:
A packages search at http://www.uk.debian.org/distrib/packages shows
the availability:
Release Package (size)
stable libstdc++2.9-glibc2.1 2.91.66-4 (99.4k
There is a further link to
http://packages.debian.org/stable/oldlibs/libstdc++2.9-glibc2.1.html
On that page you see View the list of files in
libstdc++2.9-glibc2.1. Try clicking on it and you'll get the above
error. I do know the package is on FTP, but you can't expect from
everyone to install off
://packages.debian.org/cgi-bin/search_packages.pl?keywords=libstdc%2B%2B2.9-glibc2.1searchon=namessubword=1version=stablerelease=all
There is a further link to
http://packages.debian.org/stable/oldlibs/libstdc++2.9-glibc2.1.html
On that page you see View the list of files in
libstdc++2.9-glibc2.1
On Thu, 16 Jan 2003 12:18:16 + Colin Watson wrote:
I do know the package is on FTP, but you can't expect from
everyone to install off the net.
Please drop language like you can't expect, as it doesn't appear
to be intentional that it isn't on the CDs.
Sorry, it wasn't meant to
to do a dist-upgrade though, because it
will almost certainly break something on my very
patchy box.[B
Is there a nice way to upgrade gradually?
For example, if I upgrade the base package from
potato (glibc2.1) to soon-to-be-stable (glibc2.2), will
my box boot, or do I need to upgrade other things
- by hand - libc6_2.1.3-18_i386.deb in e.g. /opt/glibc2.1 is there
then a way to:
1) tell the Fortran compiler to use the libraries in that directory?
or
2) at run time specify LD_PRELOAD?? LD_LIBRARY_PATH or similar so dynamical
linking is not done against the standard /lib/libc.so.6?
I e-mailed
aphro wrote:
was thinking about this for a while, would it be possible to install
glibc2.1 in a chroot() enviornment in slink? has anyone tried
this?
It's the standard way to get build-depends information, so it's
pretty common. I do all my potato builds on a chroot potato on a
slink
was thinking about this for a while, would it be possible to install
glibc2.1 in a chroot() enviornment in slink? has anyone tried this? i
got too much stuff customized in my home machine to upgrade it to potato
99.9% of my important stuff will break.
if anyone has tried this lemme know what
On Fri, Feb 18, 2000 at 08:21:47AM -0800, aphro wrote:
was thinking about this for a while, would it be possible to install
glibc2.1 in a chroot() enviornment in slink? has anyone tried this? i
got too much stuff customized in my home machine to upgrade it to potato
99.9% of my important
Remco van 't Veer wrote:
I sure hope 8i runs on potato. Can anybody confirm this?
Regards,
Remco
Hi,
It seems to work fine. Although I only installed it and haven't used it
much at all yet. I did do some imports which went normally though.
$ sqlplus
SQL*Plus: Release 8.1.5.0.0
this?
It should. It needs glibc2.1 and kernel 2.2 (and a lot of memory).
I saw it running on redhat. It was packaged or installed (I don't know how
it came up on that machine) very amateurly. It did not even contain the
jdbc driver in the java classpath.
Regards,
Robert
the 8.0.5 on another machine with glibc2.0.7 and
robi kernel 2.2, so I think the problem is with glibc2.1
robi
robi What should I do to make oracle work?
robi
robi Robert Varga
robi
robi
robi --
robi Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
robi
not give any other error messages.
However when I tried to run sqlplus, it also segfaulted. I presume all
others would segfault as well.
I managed to install the 8.0.5 on another machine with glibc2.0.7 and
kernel 2.2, so I think the problem is with glibc2.1
What should I do to make
On Wed, 29 Dec 1999, Remco van 't Veer wrote:
You need to patch the Oracle binaries to get 8.0.5 running on
glibc-2.1 based systems. Please follow
http://jordan.fortwayne.com/oracle/rh6x.html for details.
HTH,
Remco
It is not clear which packages should I install in debian since it is
On Wed, Dec 29, 1999 at 17:38, Robert Varga wrote:
You need to patch the Oracle binaries to get 8.0.5 running on
glibc-2.1 based systems. Please follow
http://jordan.fortwayne.com/oracle/rh6x.html for details.
It is not clear which packages should I install in debian since it is for
On Wed, 29 Dec 1999, Remco van 't Veer wrote:
On Wed, Dec 29, 1999 at 17:38, Robert Varga wrote:
1) Change to the directory where you downloaded your patch.
* cd ~/orapatch
2) Extract the patch.
* tar -xvzf glibcpatch.tgz
3) Run the script.
* sh
On Wed, Dec 29, 1999 at 19:47, Robert Varga wrote:
Due to the problem b: it did not build anything, but make my binaries
vanish (got renamed). After I set these to point to /usr/bin/gcc272 and
/usr/bin/ld I got only messages for error a:, however the binaries built
segfaulted again. Did not
the problem is with glibc2.1
What should I do to make oracle work?
Robert Varga
I have searched the archives for this, and have found (very
surprisingly) nothing -- perhaps I searched wrong?
I would like to upgrade my 2.1r2 system to glibc2.1, and dependent
packages. I would like to do so such that I maintain the consistency
of my package database.
In otherwords, I want
On Tue, 7 Dec 1999, Ethan Benson wrote:
[ snip ]
: c) What is the preferred method of taking my 2.1r2 through an unstable
: upgrade? Specifically, how do I do it?
:
: edit /etc/apt/apt.sources and change all instances of `stable' with
`unstable'
:
: then run apt-get update ; apt-get
On 9/11/99 Bob Nielsen wrote:
1. Point /etc/apt/sources.list to unstable instead of stable.
This does not appear to work on the non-us.debian.org site, i still
have to add the lines like so:
... non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US dists/unstable/non-US/main/binary-i386/
does anyone know what
On 9/11/99 Bob Nielsen wrote:
deb http://pandora.debian.org/debian-non-US unstable/non-US main
contrib non-free
thanks, this works perfectly.
why is non-us.debian.org still broken?
Best Regards,
Ethan Benson
To obtain my PGP key: http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/pgp/
On Tue, 9 Nov 1999, Ethan Benson wrote:
why is non-us.debian.org still broken?
It isn't.
lynx http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US/ works entirely as expected.
Jason
I use the following:
deb http://pandora.debian.org/debian-non-US unstable/non-US main contrib
non-free
On Tue, Nov 09, 1999 at 05:28:52PM -0900, Ethan Benson wrote:
On 9/11/99 Bob Nielsen wrote:
1. Point /etc/apt/sources.list to unstable instead of stable.
This does not appear to work
I've been using this for awhile...
deb ftp://ftp.de.debian.org/debian-non-US potato/non-US main contrib non-free
--
++
| Eric G. Milleregm2@jps.net |
| GnuPG public key: http://www.jps.net/egm2/gpg.asc |
On Tue, 9 Nov 1999, Ethan Benson wrote:
: does anyone know what is broken? is it apt-get or is it the non-US
: site, it looks to me like the non-US site is in order...
non-us.debian.org was unreachable (at least from here) yesterday -
apparently there was a routing loop in the Netherlands.
At 08:28 AM 11/10/99 -0600, Nathan E Norman wrote:
On Tue, 9 Nov 1999, Ethan Benson wrote:
: does anyone know what is broken? is it apt-get or is it the non-US
: site, it looks to me like the non-US site is in order...
non-us.debian.org was unreachable (at least from here) yesterday -
Now that potato is delayed until next year I think I
should try upgrading to glibc2.1 at least. There are
just too many fine programs out on freshmeat that
require 2.1 over 2.0. I know that it's been posted
before, but I've lost the url... can someone repeat
the procedure to upgrade slink
On Tue, Nov 09, 1999 at 05:34:46AM -0800, Kenneth Scharf wrote:
Now that potato is delayed until next year I think I
should try upgrading to glibc2.1 at least. There are
just too many fine programs out on freshmeat that
require 2.1 over 2.0. I know that it's been posted
before, but I've
Just recently upgraded glibc2.1 and others. Just now I tried to exit
from tty1 and got the following:
$ exit
logout
/sbin/getty: error in loading shared libraries: /lib/libc.so.6: symbol
_dl_origin_patt(, version GLIBC_2.1.1 not defined in file ld-linux.so.2
with link time reference
I want to run a glibc2.1 app (IBM's jdk1.1.8) on our development
machines here, but don't want to switch to potato quite yet. What's the
safest way to get glibc2.1 on my system so this program can see it? I'm
currently thinking of building it, sticking it in a corner somewhere and
writing wrapper
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Mon, 16 Aug 1999, Oliver wrote:
I've got a CD from Oracle with ORACLE 8.1.5. This RDBMS uses glibc2.1. How
can I change the C-Libraries?
1. install glibc2.1 from tar archive
2. ldconfig glibc2.1 (name ?)
Instead, you may want to use the potato debs
Hallo,
I've got a CD from Oracle with ORACLE 8.1.5. This RDBMS uses glibc2.1. How
can I change the C-Libraries?
1. install glibc2.1 from tar archive
2. ldconfig glibc2.1 (name ?)
Will my system run after the exchange? Do I have to recompile packages?
thx!,
oliver
A couple of weeks ago I posted to the list asking about trying out
glibc 2.1 without upgrading my whole system to potato. I got some
responses (which I didn't save, sorry). Here's what worked for me.
The best solution was to create a potato subdirectory, chroot to it,
untar the potato base system
Raj Manandhar wrote:
Is there any way of trying out the libc2.1 package from potato without
upgrading everything to potato? I tried a simple dpkg -i on the .deb,
but one needs apt0.3, and that apt requires libc2.1.
on 06/03/99 i downloaded apt_0.3.6.1_i386.deb for slink. the url(?) was
in a
for what it's worth after having massive problems with netscape being stable
after my upgrade to communicator 4.6 i downloaded the old debian 451
packages from a slow to update debian mirror and it's working perfectly.
here's my setup, i hope it helps someone:
heyzeus(larry) dpkg -l | egrep
Is there any way of trying out the libc2.1 package from potato without
upgrading everything to potato? I tried a simple dpkg -i on the .deb,
but one needs apt0.3, and that apt requires libc2.1.
I'm kind of leery of upgrading everything to unstable, but I figure if
I just try libc, I can downgrade
On Thu, 10 Jun 1999, Raj Manandhar wrote:
Is there any way of trying out the libc2.1 package from potato without
upgrading everything to potato? I tried a simple dpkg -i on the .deb,
but one needs apt0.3, and that apt requires libc2.1.
Well, you could always grab the sources from potato and
Can anyone point me towards a document on installing glibc2.1
under slink? I could have sworn that I found such a reference
somewhere, but now I can't seem to find it again.
Anyway, is it a relatively safe matter of downloading a few updated
packages working out dependencies (which is about
If you really need glibc2.1, upgrade to potato. Just sticking glibc2.1 into
slink
will undoubtedly do nasty things.
Sean
Craig McPherson wrote:
Can anyone point me towards a document on installing glibc2.1
under slink? I could have sworn that I found such a reference
somewhere, but now I
Hi,
has anyone tried this version of oracle with glibc2,1??
I am getting coredump... any work around??
Could someone also confirm me if this version of oracle will work under
glibc2.0??
Thanks..
Shao.
--
Hi,
I am running Oracle 8.0.5.0 on a slink (glib2.0) machine and it works
very well.
BTW, version 8.0.5.1 (enterprise edition) has been released some
months ago and is downloadable from the web. You can find it at:
ftp://ftp.oracle.com/pub/www/otn/linux/.
It will probably not fix your problem.
So yesterday I finally decided to upgrade my machine to glibc2.1. Well, the
upgrade of over 70 packages went very smoothly--many thanks, apt developers!
Anyway, after upgrading I ran into a problem while running dh_make. Seems it
doesn't like some of the sed expressions in there, but I can't
with dwww. What package version of glibc2.1 are you using?
[snip rest of report]
Now for the big question :) Does anyone know how I can get solve these
problems? I am now running all the latest from potato. I know this is a
long message, but I wanted to give enough information to be helpful
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999 15:11:40 CST, wrote:
Hello,
I was the one who posted the original message for help with this.
After reading your message, I played around with the soffice wrapper that
calls soffice.bin. Here's how I got mine to work...
1) I got the libc deb from slink.
2) I manually
Rick == Rick Cosby [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Rick Hmm - that would only work if it were installed. I can't
Rick get it installed at all
- Create a directory named /usr/local/slink, and get and untar the
following file in there:
David Stern [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On 27 Mar 1999 23:14:05 +0200, wrote:
I hope noone minds if I expand on this thread a little. Sorry, but
there's too much to quote. Summary: running up to date potato,
apparently glibc2.1 replaced glibc2.0 and staroffice stopped working.
Jules
Hi all!
How can I tell how much time a program spent running? (Real elapsed
time as well as cpu time or something).
Also: apt-get install of some things wants to upgrade me to glibc2.1
etc. (from regular glibc2). is this safe yet? ive heard it breaks things!:(
Thanks!
Timothy
Hrrm, ever since I've upgraded to potato(and glibc2.1 thereby) my
'who' command has been semi-broken... it will run, but consistantly
displays that no one is logged into the system. Anyone know what is
going on?
--Evan
--
Evan Van Dyke E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Perhaps using the smotif (or lesstiff) version will let you work with it ?
Ever since upgrading to glibc2.1 my ddd has been segfaulting upon
startup... anyone know how this is doing in the 'fix' line?
I see that it's been reported to the buglist, but no recent
info...
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999 15:11:40 CST, wrote:
Hello,
I was the one who posted the original message for help with this.
After reading your message, I played around with the soffice wrapper that
calls soffice.bin. Here's how I got mine to work...
1) I got the libc deb from slink.
2) I manually
Ever since upgrading to glibc2.1 my ddd has been segfaulting upon
startup... anyone know how this is doing in the 'fix' line?
I see that it's been reported to the buglist, but no recent
info...
--Evan
--
Evan Van Dyke E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Page: [EMAIL
On Tue, Mar 30, 1999 at 21:25:30 -0600, Evan Van Dyke wrote:
Ever since upgrading to glibc2.1 my ddd has been segfaulting upon
startup... anyone know how this is doing in the 'fix' line?
3.1.3-2, which is built on a potato system, has been installed in the
archive in yesterday's run; it should
David Stern [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Tue, 30 Mar 1999 15:11:40 CST, wrote:
Hello,
I was the one who posted the original message for help with this.
After reading your message, I played around with the soffice wrapper that
calls soffice.bin. Here's how I got mine to work...
1) I
Hello:
Well, now that we've all got Star Office 5.0 running on the latest
cutting-edge potato systems, can anyone print from it?? When I try, I get
the following messages:
sh: /home/myuser/Office50/glibc2/libdl.so.2: no version information available
(required by sh)
sh:
On Wed, 31 Mar 1999 09:36:23 CST, wrote:
Hello:
Well, now that we've all got Star Office 5.0 running on the latest
cutting-edge potato systems, can anyone print from it?? When I try, I get
the following messages:
[..]
sh: /home/myuser/Office50/glibc2/libdl.so.2: no version information
On 27 Mar 1999 23:14:05 +0200, wrote:
I hope noone minds if I expand on this thread a little. Sorry, but
there's too much to quote. Summary: running up to date potato,
apparently glibc2.1 replaced glibc2.0 and staroffice stopped working.
Jules Bean suggested a wrapper for staroffice:
1.) Get
pgpd3KtnN93Gk.pgp
Description: PGP message
RKL == Ryan K Losh [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
RKL I know that I'm probably a moron for running up to date potato
RKL systems. However, when potato moved to Glibc 2.1, my Star Office
RKL 5 stopped working. Is there any way to have BOTH Glibc 2.0 and
RKL 2.1, or is there some other way to make
Hola a todos...
Estoy tratando de recompilar glibc2.1, pero necesita una version de
makeinfo, que no se donde se puede conseguir.
¿Sabe alguien?
Saludos.
Hola a todos...
He visto que se esta tratando de lanzar el glib2.1, y como supongo, que el
cambio desde 2.0.7, puede ser algo traumatico, me gustaria documentarme
sobre el proceso de actualizacion, pero no se donde buscar esta
documentacion. ¿Me podeis ayudar?
Gracias y saludos.
On Tue, 16 Mar 1999, Angel Vicente Perez wrote:
He visto que se esta tratando de lanzar el glib2.1, y como supongo, que el
cambio desde 2.0.7, puede ser algo traumatico, me gustaria documentarme
sobre el proceso de actualizacion, pero no se donde buscar esta
documentacion. ¿Me podeis ayudar?
bash..., si no es por la lista, dejo de usar Debian.
Por eso, cuando he visto que habia salido el glibc2.1, un sudorcillo helado,
me recorrio la espalda, y me he dicho cuidadin y a leer, que la otra vez no
lo hice y mira.
Ahora tengo la oportunidad de dar marcha atras, dispongo de un ordenador en
Hola a todos...
Sigo haciendo pruebas, y he observado lo siguiente: cuando instalo
libreadlineg2 me quedo sin interprete de comandos. Esto ya me paso en el
cambio de bo a hamm, y no consigo recordar porque fue, y como lo arregle.
Saludos.
Menos mal que tengo dos discos.
Shortly after installing the new glibc 2.1 packages, I noticed that
init had started to run away:
USER PID %CPU %MEM SIZE RSS TTY STAT START TIME COMMAND
root 1 12.5 13.0 8944 8300 ? R17:42 44:26 init [2]
(That RSS is awfully big, too, but doesn't seem to be
Greg Wooledge ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
Shortly after installing the new glibc 2.1 packages, I noticed that
init had started to run away:
(Is it safe to reboot at this point, or should I drop back to glibc 2.0?)
Well, my computer decided the matter for me. About half an hour after
writing
71 matches
Mail list logo
