(Illustration by Gaich Muramatsu)
>>>>> "jaharkes" == jaharkes <jaharkes_at_cs.cmu.edu> writes: jaharkes> Hmm, venus is dynamically linked against libc.so.6, and jaharkes> didn't redhat move to glibc2.1? I will be bitching and jaharkes> moaning into the new century if they actually managed to jaharkes> break the libc binary API, without changing the version jaharkes> number. But it really looks like the new glibc is jaharkes> suspect. Speaking as a Debian developer, I was personally impacted by *several* breakages in the libc binary API when Debian 2.2 moved from glibc2.0 to 2.1. Namely, simple libraries like GLib (the partner in crime of GTK+) no longer worked, because of backwards incompatibilities. Basically, I wouldn't be surprised at all if this is due to glibc2.1 crap. They really released it far too early, with way too many backwards incompatibilities.. -- Brought to you by the letters X and Y and the number 14. "Bill Gates is a talented evil man." Debian GNU/Linux maintainer of Gimp and GTK+ -- http://www.debian.org/ I'm on FurryMUCK as Che, and EFNet/Open Projects IRC as Che_Fox.Received on 1999-04-30 16:58:18