[BL] Use glibc2.3 binaries on BL3 (was: netpbm)

sindi keesan keesan at sdf.lonestar.org
Sat Oct 29 14:59:23 EDT 2005

On Fri, 28 Oct 2005, David Moberg wrote:

Re a netpbm built with libc6 (glibc) because some of the programs in it 
would not compile with libc5:

> Should it be built like busybox (all functionality in one large binary) or in
> the standard way (hundreds of small binaries, one per function)? Is it
> reasonable to expect the user to have libtiff, libjpeg, etc. or should they
> be built in? What versions of these libraries are people likely to have?
> (I really don't know) What do you think of all this, Mikkel?

I would prefer separate programs since I don't use most of them, and not 
statically compiled.  I also use libtiff, libjpeg, etc. with the delilinux 
Xvesa and maybe other things (ghostscript?).  Maybe you could compile 
dynamically for use with libc6-based libjpeg, and then, in addition, 
compile static pnmtotiff, pnmtojpeg, etc., for those who want to use the 
programs in BL3 without having to deal with pairs of libjpeg etc (libc5 
and libc6).

>> Has anyone used a color laser printer with BL yet?
> I have not.

The instructions are from 1999 so I suspect the software they provide (to 
be installed in /usr) will work with BL3.  I have also installed libc5 in 
BL2 so can try both ways.

They seem to call for a 127MB or larger hard drive in the printer itself - 
sort of like the tail wagging the dog if used with BL3. (But maybe the 
software they add to linux is also larger than BL3 itself).

>> Anyway, I can think of lots of uses for netpbm, and it would be more
>> convenient to use with BL2 if I did not also have to keep libc5 on hand
>> and point things at other libraries built with it.
> That is for sure.
> I have not really tried to use many programs with diverse library
> requirements under BL3. I wonder if a problem (similar to what you
> have experienced) would occur if you tried to juggle as many
> libraries on top of BL3.

I have both BL3 and BL2 on my computers.  BL3 works with Abiword where BL2 
will not (for a video card that I can't get to work in standard X, and 
Xvesa from delilinux won't work with BL2 xset).  Apart from that and 
netpbm, I am using only programs compiled for BL2 (or SW81 glibc 2.2.5 - 
opera, precompiled xpdf).  My lynx won't work in BL3.

Except on the 486 laptop we are using only BL3 because it is smaller and 
was simpler to set up and already worked with pcmcia (which I got working 
eventually with BL2).

People have now given us three working and two sort-of-working pentium 
laptops.  We are now recycling desktops slower than 200MHz because people 
are giving us 400-500MHz working machines this year.  But maybe other 
parts of the world don't have this sort of access to hardware under 10 
years old.

Is it time to stop supporting 486?  Are there other list members using 486 
(386?) laptops with small hard disk or not enough RAM for BL2?

Maybe it is time to redo BL3 with a later libc?  Recompile Xvesa for glibc 
(2.2.5?), recompile the kernel too, and anything else in the basic setup 
which is not already statically compiled against uClibc?
> David
> _______________________________________________
> BasLinux mailing list
> BasLinux at lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/baslinux

keesan at sdf.lonestar.org
SDF Public Access UNIX System - http://sdf.lonestar.org

More information about the BasLinux mailing list