Adam Di Carlo wrote: > Oscar Levi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > I've been distracted by revenue production for a couple of months. > > Are we expected to upload our packages rebuilt for glibc2.1? > > It wouldn't hurt but I don't think it's necessary. glibc2.1 can > drop-in replace 2.0 (unless you have a program that depends on certain > internal stuff which it shouldn't be using anyway). > > Really, what is more important and has changed is CC from gcc272 to > egcs. But again, it would probably be nice to recompile sometime over > then next two months, but not really necessary AFAIK.
But doesn't that require glibc2.1 anyway? Package: gcc 2.91.66-1 depends: libc6 (>= 2.1) [etc] (Hmmm. Looks like my slink box will need to go glibc2.1 after all.) -- Peter Galbraith, research scientist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Maurice Lamontagne Institute, Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada P.O. Box 1000, Mont-Joli Qc, G5H 3Z4 Canada. 418-775-0852 FAX: 775-0546 6623'rd GNU/Linux user at the Counter - http://counter.li.org/