X-pop3-spooler: POP3MAIL 2.1.0 b 4 980420 -bs- Message-ID: <19980914032357.45671@cerebro.laendle> Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1998 03:23:57 +0200 From: Marc Lehmann To: Shawn Leas Cc: beastium Subject: Re: libc-5.4.22?!? Mail-Followup-To: Shawn Leas , beastium References: <19980913232212 DOT 07025 AT cerebro DOT laendle> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii In-Reply-To: ; from Shawn Leas on Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 04:27:26AM -0500 X-Operating-System: Linux version 2.1.120 (root AT cerebro) (gcc version pgcc-2.91.57 19980901 (egcs-1.1 release)) Status: RO Content-Length: 1446 Lines: 35 On Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 04:27:26AM -0500, Shawn Leas wrote: > On Sun, 13 Sep 1998, Marc Lehmann wrote: > > > On Sun, Sep 13, 1998 at 04:11:00AM -0500, Shawn Leas wrote: > > > On Sun, 13 Sep 1998, Marc Lehmann wrote: > > > > > > RedHat has glibc 2.0.6+ a bunch of patches making it 2.0.7 or something. > > > That's just fine for a libc, and your libc5 is just there so you can run > > > most Slackware stuff. > > > > he asked libc-5.3 vs. libc 5.4, this is an issue independent of glibc and > > slackware. > > But when he's running RedHat he isn't even going to use his libc5 to link > the egcs/pgcc binary, making it a non-issue. You forget that - not all redhat versions use glibc - users that ask such questions usually use the binary snapshot, which requires glibc1 > I think he was just worried about the stated requirements on the web page, > and in particular one that only applies when using libc5 as the default > libc on your linux system. No, it applies if he's using the provided pgcc binary. -----==- | ----==-- _ | ---==---(_)__ __ ____ __ Marc Lehmann +-- --==---/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / pcg AT goof DOT com |e| -=====/_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ --+ The choice of a GNU generation | |