On Mon, Jan 01, 2001 at 01:16:44PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 1 Jan 2001, Andreas Mohr wrote:
> > Maybe it would be good if several glibc versions were checked...
> > (I'll test 2.2-6 now, too...)
> >
> > Andreas Mohr
> >
> You mean to check that the workaround doesn't break a broken glibc,
> right? If you get this, it doesn't. I added the dummy dlopen, but I
> haven't removed all the dlerror()s. Is that what you meant?
Exactly this.
Good to hear.
2.2-6 works with it, too.
And 2.2-7 obviously doesn't exist. At least ftp.us.debian.org only carries
2.2-6 and -8.
> This glibc must be a terrible hack. Maybe we should do our own? Can't
> be as hard as winelib... the interfaces are fairly well defined :-)
ROTFL !
Hmm, maybe we really ought to add that dummy dlopen() to Wine startup then.
I'm afraid we don't have much choice here :-\
I already filed a bug report to Debian, BTW.
Not sure whether it's a fault of their packaging or the libc version itself,
of course.
Well, at least it's good to have a workaround only exactly one day
after the release of that version...
Andreas Mohr
