glibc advice

[Tony Alfrey]

Net Llama! wrote:
> On Thu, 5 Oct 2006, Tony Alfrey wrote:

<snip>
>>>
>> No, in fact most of the time I run a Mac, which runs like most linux
>> distros *should* run.
>> But back to glibc-2.3.
>> Is it mythology that if I upgrade to 2.3, apps compiled on 2.2.X will
>> not run?
> 
> Its false.  Why you're beating the Caldera dead horse, I can't understand.

What difference does it make?
It has a kernel, it has X, it has QT libs, it has KDE.
I know where everything is in it.  Think of it like my version of LFS.

I'll give you an example of why I'm not running something fancy and new, 
like SuSE 10.1.  If you've been watching the SuSE list, there are a lot 
of people whose experience with SuSE has been, shall we say, less than 
pleasant.  And I will say that, for example, YAST has gotten sloppier 
from SuSE 8.1 to 9.1.  Now I know you are a FC fanatic, but I can 
remember a raging debate about whether or not Red Hat had committed a 
cardinal sin by placing KDE in directories all over the map instead of 
in /opt.  So that's why I beat this horse;  because it doesn't fall on 
its face a quarter lap out of the gates and break every bone in it's 
left hind leg.




-- 
Tony Alfrey
tonyalfrey at earthlink.net
"I'd Rather Be Sailing"