Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Kelly Clowers wrote: > On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Carl Fink wrote: >> On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:50:36AM +0100, Brian wrote: >>> On Sun 09 Sep 2012 at 19:00:33 -0400, Carl Fink wrote: >>> Never mind, I just checked and Sid is also running 2.13. Apparently I'd have to use ANOTHER DISTRO to get a glibc less than 18 months old. >>> >>> Maybe first read the thread starting at >>> >>> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00466.html >> >> A thread in which someone says the only way to proceed is to file a bug >> against glibc, and another gives a way to reach the glibc team? >> >> Apparently even Sid won't be updated with anything newer until after Wheezy >> releases, and not soon after that. So what do people think of Arch Linux as >> my next years-worth of Linux? > Not a fan of the Arch user culture at all. Also not a fan of their crazy > packaging system, to the extent that I have been exposed to it. >From my limited use of Arch, I have nothing bad to say about the "Arch user culture" and nothing but good things to say about its packages and its packaging system. Different strokes for different folks... > I can't speak for others, but if I really needed a newer glibc that > bad, I wold probably add Ubuntu to my sources.list, and make > a hybrid. For glibc, you might end up pulling in a lot of packages... If I were to install an Ubuntu package on Debian - *IF* - I wouldn't add any Ubuntu repository to sources.list. I'd download the deb file and install it with dpkg. It may be less work to install Arch (or Ubuntu 12.10, which has the latest glibc, 2.14) but, if you want to have the latest glibc on Debian, you could get the source from eglibc.org, rebuild the binary packages that come from it, and install them; assuming that nothing on your system'll choke on the new version. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOdo=sw+lukaqfkvhngms420+ggh7yjgbkn6zaywntkqv8w...@mail.gmail.com
Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?
On Lu, 10 sep 12, 09:06:56, Kelly Clowers wrote: > > I can't speak for others, but if I really needed a newer glibc that > bad, I wold probably add Ubuntu to my sources.list, and make > a hybrid. For glibc, you might end up pulling in a lot of packages... > > Later, when Debian gets it you can roll back into pure Debian. > You have to be very comfortable with resolving crazy apt conflicts > to pull this off though, which is why I can't necessarily recommend > it for others. But I can't imagine needing a new glibc that badly. glibc from Ubuntu?!?! I got the shivers just by reading your mail :p Kind regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?
On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Carl Fink wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:50:36AM +0100, Brian wrote: >> On Sun 09 Sep 2012 at 19:00:33 -0400, Carl Fink wrote: >> >> > Never mind, I just checked and Sid is also running 2.13. Apparently I'd >> > have >> > to use ANOTHER DISTRO to get a glibc less than 18 months old. >> > >> > Really? >> > >> > Developers: really? >> > >> > I gauess the only way to get an answer to the above rhetorical question >> > would be to file a bug against glibc--that's how to reach the glibc team, >> > right? >> >> Maybe first read the thread starting at >> >>http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00466.html > > A thread in which someone says the only way to proceed is to file a bug > against glibc, and another gives a way to reach the glibc team? > > Apparently even Sid won't be updated with anything newer until after Wheezy > releases, and not soon after that. So what do people think of Arch Linux as > my next years-worth of Linux? Not a fan of the Arch user culture at all. Also not a fan of their crazy packaging system, to the extent that I have been exposed to it. I can't speak for others, but if I really needed a newer glibc that bad, I wold probably add Ubuntu to my sources.list, and make a hybrid. For glibc, you might end up pulling in a lot of packages... Later, when Debian gets it you can roll back into pure Debian. You have to be very comfortable with resolving crazy apt conflicts to pull this off though, which is why I can't necessarily recommend it for others. But I can't imagine needing a new glibc that badly. Cheers, Kelly Clowers -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAFoWM=8ebfvatzrtn47ruxuoaamdpzc0f+tf5tcbgrkcj-r...@mail.gmail.com
Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?
On Sun, 09 Sep 2012 19:00:33 -0400, Carl Fink wrote: > On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 05:12:35PM -0400, Carl Fink wrote: >> Some non-packaged software, e.g. the BOINC client, requires a >> relatively recent version of glibc. There always be some package that requires some version for some library. This loop can only be broken when using rolling-alike linux distributions (or you have the patience to do the manual job without breaking a current system). >> Wheezy, the latest non-unstable version of Debian, is stuck at 2.13, >> released 1.5 years ago, and since it is frozen there won't be a new >> glibc available for some undetermined amount of time probably not less >> than six months. Sid also shares the same version since July, very recent. >> So aside from waiting for jessie to exist, what are my options? Your options for "today"? Self-compiling. Your options for the long-term? Sticking to Sid. >> Has anyone tried installing glibc from unstable in a Wheezy system? How >> usable is sid, these days? No, too dangerous to my taste. > Never mind, I just checked and Sid is also running 2.13. Apparently I'd > have to use ANOTHER DISTRO to get a glibc less than 18 months old. > > Really? > > Developers: really? The core of developers are not here. > I gauess the only way to get an answer to the above rhetorical question > would be to file a bug against glibc--that's how to reach the glibc > team, right? Maybe there's a compelling reason for still using such "old" version of glibc but asking to people in charge is not going to do any bad. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/k2krae$77j$2...@ger.gmane.org
Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 09:27:00AM +0100, Brian wrote: > On Sun 09 Sep 2012 at 21:23:16 -0400, Carl Fink wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:50:36AM +0100, Brian wrote: > > > > > > Maybe first read the thread starting at > > > > > >http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00466.html > > > > A thread in which someone says the only way to proceed is to file a bug > > against glibc, and another gives a way to reach the glibc team? > > And a third mentions a bug is already opened. And the bug is apparently going to sit unfixed until after Wheezy releases. Leaving me still unable to get a semi-fresh glibc. -- Carl Fink nitpick...@nitpicking.com Read my blog at blog.nitpicking.com. Reviews! Observations! Stupid mistakes you can correct! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120910110234.ga26...@panix.com
Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?
On Sun 09 Sep 2012 at 21:23:16 -0400, Carl Fink wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:50:36AM +0100, Brian wrote: > > > > Maybe first read the thread starting at > > > >http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00466.html > > A thread in which someone says the only way to proceed is to file a bug > against glibc, and another gives a way to reach the glibc team? And a third mentions a bug is already opened. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120910082700.GW24280@desktop
Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?
On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:50:36AM +0100, Brian wrote: > On Sun 09 Sep 2012 at 19:00:33 -0400, Carl Fink wrote: > > > Never mind, I just checked and Sid is also running 2.13. Apparently I'd have > > to use ANOTHER DISTRO to get a glibc less than 18 months old. > > > > Really? > > > > Developers: really? > > > > I gauess the only way to get an answer to the above rhetorical question > > would be to file a bug against glibc--that's how to reach the glibc team, > > right? > > Maybe first read the thread starting at > >http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00466.html A thread in which someone says the only way to proceed is to file a bug against glibc, and another gives a way to reach the glibc team? Apparently even Sid won't be updated with anything newer until after Wheezy releases, and not soon after that. So what do people think of Arch Linux as my next years-worth of Linux? -- Carl Fink nitpick...@nitpicking.com Read my blog at blog.nitpicking.com. Reviews! Observations! Stupid mistakes you can correct! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120910012316.gb6...@panix.com
Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?
On 09/09/2012 02:12 PM, Carl Fink wrote: > Some non-packaged software, e.g. the BOINC client, requires a relatively > recent version of glibc. BOINC 7.0.27 migrated to wheezy about a month ago (and is thus listed on http://packages.debian.org/search?keywords=boinc ). Before then, I was using the packaging from sid without any issues. I can't address your wider question, but as a frequent user of boinc-client, I figured I should point that out :) -- Robert Wall OpenPGP: D722 7F0A F510 A3F7 8123 6382 B650 13A4 9375 5E08 signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?
On Sun 09 Sep 2012 at 19:00:33 -0400, Carl Fink wrote: > Never mind, I just checked and Sid is also running 2.13. Apparently I'd have > to use ANOTHER DISTRO to get a glibc less than 18 months old. > > Really? > > Developers: really? > > I gauess the only way to get an answer to the above rhetorical question > would be to file a bug against glibc--that's how to reach the glibc team, > right? Maybe first read the thread starting at http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00466.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120909235036.GV24280@desktop
Re: glibc version in Wheezy--any way to use 2.15?
On Sun, Sep 09, 2012 at 05:12:35PM -0400, Carl Fink wrote: > Some non-packaged software, e.g. the BOINC client, requires a relatively > recent version of glibc. > > Wheezy, the latest non-unstable version of Debian, is stuck at 2.13, > released 1.5 years ago, and since it is frozen there won't be a new glibc > available for some undetermined amount of time probably not less than six > months. > > So aside from waiting for jessie to exist, what are my options? Has anyone > tried installing glibc from unstable in a Wheezy system? How usable is sid, > these days? Never mind, I just checked and Sid is also running 2.13. Apparently I'd have to use ANOTHER DISTRO to get a glibc less than 18 months old. Really? Developers: really? I gauess the only way to get an answer to the above rhetorical question would be to file a bug against glibc--that's how to reach the glibc team, right? -- Carl Fink nitpick...@nitpicking.com Read my blog at blog.nitpicking.com. Reviews! Observations! Stupid mistakes you can correct! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120909230033.ga1...@panix.com
Re: glibc version
>> I want to install Oracle 8i on my woody box. >> The Oracle installation requires glibc 2.1.3 version. >> I was looking for glibc package, but i didn't found >> it. >> The only package that names glibc is libstdc++ >> >> What package should I install to satisfy the glibc >> 2.1.3 >> requirement? >> >> thanks >snip > >libc6 2.1.3 is in Debian Stable. Wouldn't downgrading libc6 to 2.1.3 on a woody/sid box break your system? This happened to me (see my previous thread "libc6 downgraded; system won't boot" on p. 8 of the August debian-users archive). In that case, someone installed libc6 2.1.3 over libc6 2.2.3, and immediately the system became unusable (everything complained about libc.so.6 not being found), and subsequently could not even boot. Thanks to John Patton for his earlier suggestions to fix that problem, by the way. I ended up completely reinstalling due to a stupid mistake on my part, so never got as far as trying his fix. Bruce
Re: glibc version
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 11:01:12PM -0700, John L. Fjellstad wrote: > Are there different versions of libc available? What if you are using > Woody (glibc 2.2), and need support for glibc2.1? > I know you can do both libc5 and libc6 (glibc2.x), but can you do > different versions of glibc? My understanding is that > glibc2.1 and glibc2.2 broke binary compatibility. You're thinking of glibc2.0 to glibc2.1, and even then it only broke some programs that used undocumented interfaces to the library. glibc2.1 to glibc2.2 is perfectly fine; there are lots of packages in Debian that haven't needed new uploads since glibc2.2 arrived and that still work, and I've just spent the last day and a half testing proprietary code at work that was compiled for glibc2.1 and running on glibc2.2 without any problems. -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: glibc version
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 05:56:58PM -0700, Jason Majors wrote: > but anyway...your answers: > glibc == libc6 > Woody meets that requirement. > You might need libc6-dev too for headers and such. Are there different versions of libc available? What if you are using Woody (glibc 2.2), and need support for glibc2.1? I know you can do both libc5 and libc6 (glibc2.x), but can you do different versions of glibc? My understanding is that glibc2.1 and glibc2.2 broke binary compatibility. Looked for it earlier (to unstaill SimCity3000), and couldn't find 2.1 -- John__ email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Quis custodiet ipsos custodes icq: thales @ 17755648 # I'm subscribed to this list, no need to cc: ##
Re: glibc version
On Tuesday 21 August 2001 04:28 pm, Eduardo Gargiulo wrote: > Hi all. > > I want to install Oracle 8i on my woody box. > The Oracle installation requires glibc 2.1.3 version. > I was looking for glibc package, but i didn't found > it. > The only package that names glibc is libstdc++ > > What package should I install to satisfy the glibc > 2.1.3 > requirement? > > thanks snip libc6 2.1.3 is in Debian Stable. Greg Madden
Re: glibc version
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 05:56:58PM -0700, Jason Majors wrote: | You might need libc6-dev too for headers and such. Not likely -- I doubt Oracle gave him the source :-). -D
Re: glibc version
RMS would be very disappointed if he knew you wanted to install Oracle... but anyway...your answers: glibc == libc6 Woody meets that requirement. You might need libc6-dev too for headers and such. On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 05:28:25PM -0700, Eduardo Gargiulo scribbled... > Hi all. > > I want to install Oracle 8i on my woody box. > The Oracle installation requires glibc 2.1.3 version. > I was looking for glibc package, but i didn't found > it. > The only package that names glibc is libstdc++ > > What package should I install to satisfy the glibc > 2.1.3 > requirement? > > thanks > > > __ > Do You Yahoo!? > Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger > http://phonecard.yahoo.com/ > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >
Re: glibc version
On Tue, Aug 21, 2001 at 05:28:25PM -0700, Eduardo Gargiulo wrote: | Hi all. | | I want to install Oracle 8i on my woody box. | The Oracle installation requires glibc 2.1.3 version. | I was looking for glibc package, but i didn't found | it. | The only package that names glibc is libstdc++ It's called "libc6" | What package should I install to satisfy the glibc 2.1.3 | requirement? The libc6 package that is in potato. -D
