Nagarjuna G. wrote:

>On Wed, Aug 21, 2002 at 12:21:22PM -0300, Leonardo Rochael Almeida wrote:
>>I don't see why the fuss. Compiling Python/Zope against RedHat 7.2
>>doesn't keep it from running under Debian. Even though Debian 3.0 runs
>>glibc 2.2, a glibc2.1 binary should be able to run without problems.
>>Specially since there isn't any C++ code in Zope, which is usually the
>>major source of incompatibilities between different library versions.
>>Glibc is reasonably upward compatible AFAIK.
>>Mentioning RedHat 7.2 as the building platform is just a short way of
>>saying that the Zope binary will expect to find libc version X, libm
>>version Y, libpthread version Z, etc, etc. If you have these or better
>>versions of your basic libraries, you don't have to worry what distro
>>you're running.
>Do we know of any failures of zope in other platforms?  If not why
>mention only RH 7.2?  That is the point.  In fact we will be gaining
>greater ground and support if we mentain that Zope is distro
>independent, infact it is OS independent.  Dependencies certainly have
>to be met for any application, not merely with Zope. 

The target binary will be built on RedHat 7.2 is what that means. It is 
likely to be compatible with most recent distributions.   Leonardo had 
it correctly, if I say "Red Hat 7.2" it implies a particular mix of 
libraries -- since we do not package in RPM format, the actual build 
distribution is relevant only for knowledge about its libraries.

While I am supportive of people who want to insure binary compatibility 
with other distributions, I'm not intersted in diverting into a question 
of "whos distribution is best/most appropriate/has the most fabulous 
license" etc.

As always, the source distribution will work anywhere you have Python 
and a C compiler to build the extensions.

Matt Kromer
Zope Corporation 

Zope-Dev maillist  -  [EMAIL PROTECTED]
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - )

Reply via email to