On Saturday 26 Oct 2002 15:43, Wesley J Landaker wrote: > On Saturday 26 October 2002 08:26 am, Pascal Terjan wrote: > > Florent BERANGER wrote: > > > RedHat have it and C applications, as KDE, are faster, it's a > > > known thing. > > > > Kde is c++ or am i wrong ? > > And the fact that cooker kde is slow does not come from glibc... > > look at the kde shipped in 9.0 it's really fast. > > All GCC C++ programs linked to glibc as well as libstdc++. Not to > mention that most of the other libraries that KDE links to also > depend on glibc. With extremely few exceptions, *every* program on > your system uses glibc regardless of the language it's written in. > > Not to say that upgrading glibc is going to necessarily have a > drastic effect on performance, but if you could only upgrade one > library and wanted to get the most bang for your buck, glibc would be > the one to pick. =)
To answer the question in the title, yes there are problems with glibc 2.3.1. It can break a lot of stuff already built against previous versions. Red Hat has used a workaround - not a fix. Gentoo has it in "unstable" (where it belongs). I would advise against rushing into it. Peter -- Gentoo Linux 1.4 (Portage 2.0.42 (default-x86-1.4, gcc-3.2, glibc-2.2.5-r7)). KDE: 3.0.4 Qt: 3.0.5 AMD Athlon(tm) XP 1600+ 512MB. Kernel: 2.4.19-win4lin. GCC 3.2 Linux user #275590 (http://counter.li.org/). up 1:23.
