X-POP3-Rcpt: mlehmann AT universe DOT sgh-net DOT de
Date: Fri, 23 Jan 1998 14:13:25 -0600 (CST)
From: Dustin Marquess <jailbird AT alcatraz DOT fdf DOT net>
To: Bernhard Rosenkraenzer <linux AT bero-online DOT ml DOT org>
cc: beastium-list AT Desk DOT nl
Subject: Re: 6x86 opts
In-Reply-To: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980123205847.28914A-100000@ufp.in-trier.de>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.96.980123141241.3440B-100000@sanitarium.fdf.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Sender: Marc Lehmann <pcg AT goof DOT com>
Status: RO
X-Status: A
Content-Length: 933
Lines: 26

On Fri, 23 Jan 1998, Bernhard Rosenkraenzer wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Jan 1998, Dustin Marquess wrote:
> 
> > 	On a side note does anybody here have any good experiences with
> > glibc 2.0.6?
> 
> I've been running glibc 2.0.6 since it came out, without problems.
> 
> >  I tried 2.0.5c a few months ago and it was a pain.  I had to
> > hack the include files to fix conflicts between glibc and kernel includes
> > to even compile anything.
> 
> That's still the case - you're not supposed to use kernel includes
> anymore, which is one of the main advantages of glibc over libc 5.x.
> (Don't hack the include files, hack the programs calling them. There are
> several sites on the net providing patches to some important apps, such as
> http://www.glibc.ml.org/.)

	If you have to hack every program you get in order to get it to
compile under glibc, it kind of breaks portability, not to mention ease of
use...

					-Dustin Marquess