Baslinux mailing list

[Sindi Keesan <keesan AT iamjlamb.com>]

> > The only reason I wanted to keep the older glibc was to compile for other
> > BL2 users who had not upgrade glibcso.  I am giving up on this as it is
> > easy and not very space consuming to upgrade glibcso.  It does not seem
> > necessary to upgrade the other four files used in compiling (linuxinc is
> > kernel specific, egcs and make and binutils from SW71 seem to work with
> > the later glibc from SW71).
> 
> So essentially, if I  don't plan to compile programs and release them for
> other BL2 users, then I'm fine upgrading my glibcso? There were no
> problems with older programs needing older libraries? If so, then it's
> good to see at least one library dependability that is fully backwards
> compaitble (as opposed to M$ VB DLLs) :)

I have not run across any such problems with backwards incompatibility, as 
long as you don't change between libc5 and glibc (libc6).

> 
> Matrix Mole matrixm AT sdf.lonestar.org SDF Public Access UNIX System -
> http://sdf.lonestar.org _______________________________________________
>