Gerardo Exequiel Pozzi schrieb:
Baho Utot wrote:Does it create complications if I install packages built with a newer glibc-2.10.1-2 on a system with an older glibc-2.9-7?Yes and no. Depending if the executable or library that is linked to glibc uses a symbol with declaring what version use via ELF versioning. You obtain it with a simple "readelf -s /path/to/executable | grep @GLIBC_2.10". Do this "readelf -s /lib/libc.so.6 | grep @GLIBC_2.10" and get an idea of the minimal functions that are only in version 2.10 ;)
I'm just taking a quick look over some random binaries: $ readelf -s file | grep @GLIBC|cut -d@ -f2 | cut -d\ -f1|sort -uFor /bin/bash, this tells me our bash should work with glibc 2.4. /bin/ls should even work with 2.3. In general, all should work unless a new symbol is used, or an old symbol had incompatible changes. This is not often the case in glibc, but there's many more problems with C++ programs and the standard C++ libs.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
