On Fri, Sep 17, 2004 at 04:44:08PM -0700, Eric Dickner wrote:
>
> --- Eric Dickner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Date: Fri, 17 Sep 2004 16:40:45 -0700 (PDT)
> > From: Eric Dickner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Subject: Re: Will Debian have libstdc++.so.5 soon?
> > To: John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> >
> > --- John Hasler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> > >
> > > Debian/Unstable:
> > >
> > > libstdc++5 - The GNU Standard C++ Library v3
> >
> > Unstable...I didn't look there. The word deters me
> > from even considering use of anything there.
$ dict unstable
2 definitions found
[ ... ]
>From WordNet (r) 2.0 [wn]:
unstable
[ ... ]
6: subject to change; variable; "a fluid situation fraught with
uncertainty"; "everything was unstable following the coup"
[syn: {fluid}]
Unstable means that the packages actually get upgraded. With stable, all
you get is security fixes.
But stable _does_ have libstdc++.so.5; you must not have it installed.
apt-get install libstdc++5
(If you got the package as source code, you will need build-essential;
that will pull in stuff you need for installing from sourcecode,
including libstdc++5-dev, etc.)
> > I have 2.4.27. Will I need the 2.6.x to use
> > "unstable" packages?
> >
> > ejd
> >
>
> PS Mehh..again with the direct reply. Sorry.
--
The world's most effective spam filter:
ln -sf /dev/full /var/mail/$USER
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
