On Thursday 02 April 2015 13:16:15 Reco wrote: > Hi. > > On Thu, 2 Apr 2015 13:06:05 -0400 > > Gene Heskett <ghesk...@wdtv.com> wrote: > > This is nucking futs: > > No, that shows that Mozilla Foundation cares about people. Would you > prefer Google's approach - latest Chrome requires kernel 3.19? > > > gene@coyote:~/bin/firefox-37/firefox$ file firefox > > firefox: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), > > dynamically linked (uses shared libs), for GNU/Linux 2.6.18, > > BuildID[sha1]=0xd9c52e07232a78690be6d991546a12bb3668601d, stripped > > > > For GNU Linux-2.6.18? And I'm running 3.2.0-4amd64? > > That's minimal kernel version that guaranteed to work. And by running > Debian-provided kernel you're saving yourself a whole lot of trouble > :) > > > Itself what, 2 years > > old? What the hell are the chances for that being compatible when > > its well north of 6 years old? My CNC machinery is running > > Ubuntu-10.04-4 LTS with kernel 2.6.32-122-rtai, 5 years old this > > month. > > Good ones. Firefox does not depend on kernel internals, and the motto > of Linux kernel project is 'you do not break userspace'. It's recorded > that people were able to run a 'rogue' executable compiled circa `92 > on modern Linux kernels. > > It's the userspace (i.e. libraries) you should worry about, not > kernel. > > So, don't look at 'file' output that much, run 'ldd'. > > Reco
"ldd" says its not an executable, but then says ldd itself is not, while "file" says its (ldd) a Bourne Again SHell script. Am I compromized? Thanks Reco. Cheers, Gene Heskett -- "There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order." -Ed Howdershelt (Author) Genes Web page <http://geneslinuxbox.net:6309/gene> -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/201504021506.42185.ghesk...@wdtv.com