If you've upgraded to packages that are made for the stock RH6.2, then you
should have already gotten the latest glibc packages for 6.2 since they're
built against it. 6.1 and 6.2 both use glibc 2.1. 6.0 does too I
think. 5.x used glibc 2.0 IIRC. It's not like you'd be changing glibc's
version too much. 2.1 is still 2.1 as far as the programs that use it are
concerned. If you were going from 2.0 to 2.1, you'd prolly wanna get the
compatability packages for glibc as well.
I use 6.2 (7.0 sounds like a POS from what I've heard.. they better have
EVERYTHING fixed before they release 7.1 or nobody will upgrade).
On Sun, 12 Nov 2000, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
> Statux, sorry for the long delay of my answer .. different
> time zone ...
> Statux wrote:
> >
> > hmm.. just as a quick note: even though the system will run, you really
> > should reboot after upgrading the system C library (glibc in this case
> > since virtually EVERYTHING is compiled against it and looks for it in
> > order to execute).
> >
> > it may very well be buggy. It's always good to read things like the
> > errata, etc. Was there a reason that you were upgrading lynx (I forget if
> > you mentioned one)? touchscreen or whatever you saw might have something
> > to do with special monitors that you can touch (just a guess based on the
> > name since I've never heard of it.. I could be wrong tho).
>
> Yes, there was a reason for upgrading lynx: https.
> the new version I wanted to install is the first I found with this an
> https-capability *in itself*. Before -- if I understood it
> correctly -- you had to build onto your non-https-capable lynx some
> encryption capabilities -- for example I have an SSLeay-RPM mixed with
> lynx-2.8.2.-2 on my machine: with this combination lynx has a good
> encryption. But I found it a bit uncomfortable in writing my web-based
> emails with this lynx version (perhaps having something to do with the
> editoring capabilities of this lynx-version...? or with me being too
> newbie to set the editoring options of lynx correctly ? ... probably not
> too far away, this last possibility ...)
>
> But if I remember correctly it was not only the new lynx-RPM, which
> was howling for libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3) -- there were several other
> installs over the last weeks I couldn'd finish because of a lacking
> libc.so.6(GLIBC_2.1.3) -- again: I hope to remember correctly in this
> regard.
>
> So I thought I could do something good in upgrading with
> glibc-2.1.3-15.i386.rpm ...
>
> I apologize for not having written down the exact error message where
> this "touchscreen" (or whatever the machine said ...was mentioned -- I
> simply got panicked when realizing I wasn't able to use the running
> consoles after the installs anymore and rushed to uninstall the whole
> bunch of new RPM'S ... I really was frightened of standing on the edge of
> having killed my complete most-loved :) GNU/LINUX :) ...
>
>
>
> >
> > I have glib-2.1.3-21 installed (as opposed to -15) and I don't have
> > problems. What version of RH are you running again?
>
> RedHat 6.1 -- still the same Kernel (2.2.12-32 on an i586) as shipped
> with RedHat6.1, but lots of programs upgraded to their version shipped
> with 6.2 ...
> Have you heard something that glib-2.1.3-21 is doing well on
> RedHat6.1 ? ... you're making me curious :)
>
> Regards --
> and thanks for your help.
>
> Wolfgang
>
>
> >
> > On Sun, 12 Nov 2000, Wolfgang Pfeiffer wrote:
> >
> > > Statux wrote:
> > > >
> > > > do an "rpm -q glibc" to see if you meet the requirements or not :)
> > >
> > > I did that:
> > >
> > > # rpm -q glibc
> > > glibc-2.1.2-11
>
> > > [... on glibc-2.1.3-15.i386.rpm and its installation ...]
>
>
>
--
-Statux
_______________________________________________
Redhat-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
