Zoki News wrote:
*** Freekin' hell! There are FIVE CD's for the new RH!! I am sure it is not
going to install on a 150Mb partition like RH 5.0 did...
RH-5 was a long long time ago. And some of us would prefer to forget
that RH5 ever existed :)
Anyhoo, i'm sure that at least of the CD's, if
OK, so RedHat has done with glibc in 8.0 essentially what they did with gcc in
7.0. That is, taken a chunk of the development version and making a RedHat
release of it.
From the release notes:
o The GNU C Library (glibc) has been updated to version 2.3 code base
and includes
I can't say that i'm overly surprised. Redhat's .0 releases have always
been notoriously buggy unstable.
Tim Wunder wrote:
OK, so RedHat has done with glibc in 8.0 essentially what they did with gcc in
7.0. That is, taken a chunk of the development version and making a RedHat
release
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Net Llama! wrote:
Zoki News wrote:
*** Freekin' hell! There are FIVE CD's for the new RH!! I am sure it is not
going to install on a 150Mb partition like RH 5.0 did...
RH-5 was a long long time ago. And some of us would prefer to forget
that RH5 ever existed :)
On Tue, Oct 01, 2002 at 10:32:59AM -0400, Tim Wunder wrote:
RedHat 8.0 apparently comes with glibc-2.2.93.
http://www.gnu.org/software/glibc says the latest glibc is 2.2.5.
RedHat 7.3 shipped with glibc-2.2.5.
Should I care that RedHat is shipping a non-standard glibc (if that's
what
thought that the development version of glibc would be 2.3.x,
isn't that the way the gnu folks do things?
No.
The appear to be the only distro shipping it, according to distrowatch,
anyway. Everybody else is shipping 2.2.5.
No one else is willing to ship a distribution with a development
On Tuesday 01 October 2002 08:19 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
Should you care? I don't know. Remember GCC 2.96? Or, how 'bout good
ole glibc 2.0.7? Better question: what does Red Hat 8.0 have than you
just have to have? Better still: can you build it yourself without
upgrading the rest
are you merely following the steps in the linux-sxs sites?
let me walk your steps again to be sure. still using glibc-2.2.1 that
came with WS 3.1. so I am a good rat.
some (not most or all) of the linux-sxs articles made certain
assumptions that's not applicable to amateurs like me. just
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002 20:30:42 -0400 (EDT)
Gerry Doris [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Net Llama! wrote:
Zoki News wrote:
*** Freekin' hell! There are FIVE CD's for the new RH!! I am sure it is not
going to install on a 150Mb partition like RH 5.0 did...
RH-5 was a long
On Tue, 01 Oct 2002 17:08:28 -0700
Net Llama! [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can't say that i'm overly surprised. Redhat's .0 releases have always
been notoriously buggy unstable.
I've found 8.0 to be neither buggy nor unstable in most aspects. Previous
releases of Red Hat, Mandrake, and
Subject: Re: glibc and RedHat 8.0
Well, according to:
ftp://ftp.uni-kl.de/pub/linux/redhat/redhat/8.0/en/os/i386/RedHat/RPMS/
snip
___
Linux-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc - http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux
In an ongoing effort to see how badly I can hose my system and *still*
have things (mostly) work, I attempted an update of binutils last night
(from 2.10 that came with Caldera, to 2.13 from source).
Much to my surprise, it seemed to compile and install without error.
But, after issuing an
Hate to interrupt all this wonderful civil war talk by responding to my
own post, but I fixed my problem...
# cp /usr/src/glibc-2.2.5/linuxthreads/libpthread.so.0 /lib/libpthread.so.0
Maybe I'll stop f***ing with my system now... (ah, what's the fun in
*that*?)
Regards,
Tim
On 9/23/2002 8:34
So it looks like your problem was that you didn't properly install all of
glibc-2.2.5?
On Mon, 23 Sep 2002, Tim Wunder wrote:
Hate to interrupt all this wonderful civil war talk by responding to my
own post, but I fixed my problem...
# cp /usr/src/glibc-2.2.5/linuxthreads/libpthread.so.0
with broken
glibc's.
To reiterate the problem:-
* if your Ch 5 gcc build says checking assembler hidden support... no
then your glibc is broken. (the glibc function __cxa_atexit will not
work properly - run glibc's make check and watch tstcxaatexit fail)
Hmmm... I try 'make check
... no
then your glibc is broken. (the glibc function __cxa_atexit will not
work properly - run glibc's make check and watch tstcxaatexit fail)
* if the binutils version on your *host* system is 2.12.1 or greater
then you should be ok - checking assembler hidden support... yes
* using
Is it possible to backrev glibc, to go from 2.2.5, that I've recently compiled and
installed, to the original glibc that came with eW3.1 or the one that came with
eW3.1.1? I'm not sure what's going wrong on my system, but I'm considering backing up,
piece by piece, to get to a state
Well, this seems a bit worrisome:
ldconfig: Cannot stat /usr/lib/libcurses.so: No such file or directory
And your kdelibs seem to be a bit mangled, or at least you're lacking
symlinks in places that should have them. Other than that, everything
appears to be ok.
On Tue, 17 Sep 2002, Tim Wunder
On 9/17/2002 2:59 PM, someone claiming to be Net Llama! wrote:
Well, this seems a bit worrisome:
ldconfig: Cannot stat /usr/lib/libcurses.so: No such file or directory
And your kdelibs seem to be a bit mangled, or at least you're lacking
symlinks in places that should have them. Other than
On Tue, Sep 17, 2002 at 02:59:06PM -0400, Net Llama! wrote:
Well, this seems a bit worrisome:
ldconfig: Cannot stat /usr/lib/libcurses.so: No such file or directory
Try:
# ln -s /usr/lib/libncurses.so /usr/lib/libcurses.so
Kurt
___
Linux-users
- Original Message -
From: Joel Hammer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, July 03, 2002 11:15 PM
Subject: Installing updated glibc: Conflicts with old install
Anyway, I downloaded the four libraries from the Caldera 2.4 current
rpm's.
They are:
glibc-2.1.3-6
Jerry McBride wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jul 2002 09:21:15 -0400 Joel Hammer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
What if I hose my machine? This machine double boots. Could I easily
reinstall the old glibc?
What I did before I installed those rpm's was to study them with midnight
commander. You can easily
Joel Hammer wrote:
I am still confused. Should I just rpm -e glibc-localedata-2.1.3-6 and try
again?
BTW, what will happen to my other glibc's (wine, fontastic) if I am
successful in installing glibc-2.1.3.6 ? Will they still work?
What if I hose my machine? This machine double boots
On Thu, 04 Jul 2002 11:50:24 -0700 Net Llama! [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Jerry McBride wrote:
On Thu, 04 Jul 2002 09:21:15 -0400 Joel Hammer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
What if I hose my machine? This machine double boots. Could I easily
reinstall the old glibc?
What I did before
limewire which I downloaded but which:
Requires a new version of Java which, which I downloaded but which:
Requires an updated glibc..
(And then they wonder why windows is still popular on the desktop. What
windows user would tolerate this for 3 seconds? Imagine just trying all
these downloads
Scribbling feverishly on May 03, Terry Chan managed to emit:
Hi,
I want to ask how to upgrade glibc-2.1.3-22 to glibc-2.2.5.
I followed the following web site,
http://linux-sxs.org/glibc.html
but when i used configure .,
it output:
checking version of gcc egcs-2.91.66bad
On Mon, 25 Feb 2002 15:45:48 +0100 Roger Oberholtzer [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote: Damn
If you get a few old messages, sorry. I have been moving mail from
Sylpheed on UnixWare to kmail on Linux.
Sylpheed keeps sent main in 'outbox'. kmail keeps stuff to send in
'outbox'. Or so I just
Damn
If you get a few old messages, sorry. I have been moving mail from Sylpheed on
UnixWare to kmail on Linux.
Sylpheed keeps sent main in 'outbox'. kmail keeps stuff to send in 'outbox'.
Or so I just discovered. So, some of my old things just got resent from
kmail...
While on the topic,
101 - 128 of 128 matches
Mail list logo
