Re: is it a real 9.0?

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 02:32:05PM -0500, Shawn wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-04-07 at 14:21, Klaasjan Brand wrote:
> > I understand not everything works out of the box on shrike, but "binary
> > incompatible" implies to me nothing running on 8.0 works on 9, which
> > isn't the case for me. Anyone got an update which software definately
> > doesn't work on 9?
> 
> Well, just about any statically linked binary that worked under 8.0
> won't work for me under 9 due to the TLS libc changes.

That doesn't count as an ABI change - pretty sure statically linking
to libc means you could break at any time, even due to an errata.
Ditto for using symbols that start with "__"

If the libc ABI were considered officially changed it would have gone
to libc.so.7 and there would be libc.so.6 in a compat package.

That's my understanding anyway.

Havoc





[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Users]     [Centos Users]     [Kernel Development]     [Red Hat Install]     [Red Hat Watch]     [Red Hat Development]     [Red Hat Phoebe Beta]     [Yosemite Forum]     [Fedora Discussion]     [Gimp]     [Stuff]     [Yosemite News]

  Powered by Linux