glibc - what is the stable release?

[Net Llama!]

On Tue, 25 Mar 2003, Collins Richey wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Mar 2003 18:57:03 -0500
> Klaus-Peter Schrage <kpschrage at gmx.de> wrote:
>
> > Net Llama! wrote:
> >
> > >>Now, Red Hat 8.0 already has 2.3.2 (-4.80) via up2date, which is a
> > >big>nuisance to the wine people (and me as a wine addict): wine
> > >simply won't>run under glib 2.3.x, and it seems to be quite a hassle
> > >to make it run>under the new glibc.
> > >
> > >
> > > do you know why it won't run?  i use wine occasionally, so this
> > > might be an issue.
> >
> > See
> > http://www.winehq.org/news/?view=155
>
> Too bad this is a private server:  "Forbidden You don't have permission
> .."

it was working fine yesterday.  i read the article, and it was mostly
Marcus Meissner debating how to fix wine horkage as a result of
glibc-2.3.x.

> a favorite function, or function abc() is now deprecated, and everyone
> needs to use abc_d(), etc.  It matters not whether it's glibc, XFree,
> KDE, or GNOME - they always reinvent the wheel and change the rules.

they're not reinventing the wheel at all.  that's a M$ tactic.  they're
making the wheel better, which unfortunately tends to leave older
technologies behind in some cases.

> I've been spoiled working in the IBM mainframe software arena for most
> of my adult life.  When you upgrade from one IBM OS release to another,
> most of the time you don't even need to recompile/reassemble unless you
> want to exploit some new functionality.

sure, when a single company controls the entire development environment,
everythihng is wonderful.  i hear M$ is great with that.  :P

>
> </a little rant>
> _______________________________________________
> Linux-users mailing list
> Linux-users at linux-sxs.org
> Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
>

-- 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Lonni J Friedman				netllama at linux-sxs.org
Linux Step-by-step & TyGeMo		     http://netllama.ipfox.com