glibc vs. eglibc
cjk at teamcharliesangels.com
Wed May 6 17:10:48 UTC 2009
On Wed, 06 May 2009 11:21:34 -0500
Patrick Goetz <pgoetz at mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
> Taking a page from Redhat's "let's break it if we can" upgrade
> policy, Debian appears to be switching from glibc to eglibc:
> Of great concern is that this library is not guaranteed to be binary
> compatible with glibc. I'm all for progress, not so much of a fan of
> pointless changes that lead to regressions and broken code.
> What are Canonical's plans for 9.10+? Follow Debian into the abyss,
> hoping for greener pastures in the Great Beyond? Does anyone think
> maybe it's time to provide some stability for the
> corporate/institutional IT folks who have stuck their necks out to
> argue for open source solutions?
Having seen this: http://blog.aurel32.net/?p=47 , it appears to
be an attempt to fix things. Apparently the maintainer of glibc is not
cooperative when things do break. Of course, all I am basing this on is
the blog entry I read.
Linux Registered User Number 425914 [http://counter.li.org/]
Never let anyone steal your DREAM. [http://keepingdreams.com]
More information about the Ubuntu-devel-discuss