Net Llama! wrote:
Well, then i must just be lucky, because I didn't need to go through any
of that ordeal. All I had to do was upgrade to the last glibc release
(late yesterday) and the problems created by the former (from early
yesterday) were solved. Granted, I'm using my own 2.4.22-xfs
Net Llama! wrote:
What last time? Let's not play revisionist historians, ok?
But there IS a history, dating back to April, see:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88456
and updating glibc to glibc-2.3.2-27.9.6 hosed my system, rendering it
unbootable.
For all co-victims,
On Fri, 14 Nov 2003, Klaus-Peter Schrage wrote:
Net Llama! wrote:
What last time? Let's not play revisionist historians, ok?
But there IS a history, dating back to April, see:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=88456
and updating glibc to glibc-2.3.2-27.9.6 hosed my
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Collins Richey wrote:
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:05:05 -0500 Kurt Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Consuming 0.8K bytes, Net Llama! blathered:
On 11/13/03 17:04, dep wrote:
quoth Kurt Wall:
| Consuming 2.3K bytes, Net Llama! blathered:
| I can vouch for this. My
Folks,
Since we've been talking about updates, I got this today from the Emperor
Linux folks, who installed RH on a couple of work laptops.
-Original Message-
Customers running Red Hat 9.0,
Red Hat has recently released a badly broken automatic update of GLIBC
and nptl onto
I can vouch for this. My RH9 box is trashed as a result.
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003, Condon Thomas A KPWA wrote:
Folks,
Since we've been talking about updates, I got this today from the Emperor
Linux folks, who installed RH on a couple of work laptops.
-Original Message-
Customers
For once I'm glad I procrastinated about installing a security update.
Thanks,
Michael
Condon Thomas A KPWA wrote:
Folks,
Since we've been talking about updates, I got this today from the Emperor
Linux folks, who installed RH on a couple of work laptops.
-Original Message-
Customers
Redhat did re-release the packages about an hour ago. Fixed my problems on
RH9.
On 11/13/03 14:32, Michael Hipp wrote:
For once I'm glad I procrastinated about installing a security update.
Thanks,
Michael
Condon Thomas A KPWA wrote:
Folks,
Since we've been talking about updates, I got this
Net Llama! wrote:
Redhat did re-release the packages about an hour ago. Fixed my problems
on RH9.
That's a pretty quick response. Kudos to 'em.
Michael
___
Linux-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -
Consuming 2.3K bytes, Net Llama! blathered:
I can vouch for this. My RH9 box is trashed as a result.
[badly borken glibc]
Whoops!
Kurt
--
Are you a turtle?
___
Linux-users mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -
quoth Kurt Wall:
| Consuming 2.3K bytes, Net Llama! blathered:
| I can vouch for this. My RH9 box is trashed as a result.
|
| [badly borken glibc]
|
| Whoops!
leave it to redhat. what was it last time? gcc-2.7.6 or something?
--
dep
Writing takes no time. It's finding something to say that
On 11/13/03 17:04, dep wrote:
quoth Kurt Wall:
| Consuming 2.3K bytes, Net Llama! blathered:
| I can vouch for this. My RH9 box is trashed as a result.
|
| [badly borken glibc]
|
| Whoops!
leave it to redhat. what was it last time? gcc-2.7.6 or something?
What last time? Let's not play
Consuming 0.8K bytes, Net Llama! blathered:
On 11/13/03 17:04, dep wrote:
quoth Kurt Wall:
| Consuming 2.3K bytes, Net Llama! blathered:
| I can vouch for this. My RH9 box is trashed as a result.
|
| [badly borken glibc]
|
| Whoops!
leave it to redhat. what was it last time?
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:05:05 -0500 Kurt Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Consuming 0.8K bytes, Net Llama! blathered:
On 11/13/03 17:04, dep wrote:
quoth Kurt Wall:
| Consuming 2.3K bytes, Net Llama! blathered:
| I can vouch for this. My RH9 box is trashed as a result.
|
| [badly
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:05:05 -0500 Kurt Wall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Consuming 0.8K bytes, Net Llama! blathered:
On 11/13/03 17:04, dep wrote:
quoth Kurt Wall:
| Consuming 2.3K bytes, Net Llama! blathered:
| I can vouch for this. My RH9 box is trashed as a result.
|
| [badly
15 matches
Mail list logo
