Kevin Kofler wrote:
Gordon Messmer <yinyang <at> eburg.com> writes:
...which seems odd. I can't see how the compat-libstdc++-296 package
actually provides compatibility with binaries that were built with gcc
2.96.
It does. libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 is the version which actually shipped with
GCC 2.96. (At least the RH one. There was no formal 2.96 release, so other
distributions may have been shipping other 2.96 variants with different
libraries.)
The missing libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2 is actually from GCC 2.95 (or EGCS, which
was the project which lead to GCC 2.95 and used the same soname).
Upstreams still building their binaries with GCC 2.95 (or 2.96 for that matter)
should really be told to get with the times. GCC is at 4.3 now, 2.95 is just a
long gone memory from the distant past.
Unfortunately people and companies who have critical commercial software for
which upgrades are unavailable or unafordable remember those days well. I have
FC4 and RH8 running in virtual machines for that very reason.
I agree that no one should be building with those libraries, but in fact people
do use binaries already using them.
--
Bill Davidsen <davidsen@xxxxxxx>
"We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked." - from Slashdot
--
fedora-list mailing list
fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines
