On 12 Dec 1997, Martin Mitchell wrote: > Chris Fearnley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > >Huh? The upgrade path is quite clear: install a newer libc5 (5.4.33-7) > > >from hamm, then you may install libc6. > > This is the correct upgrade path, perhaps the howto needs to be clarified > on this point.
Installing libc5 from hamm forces you to abandon your old libc5 development system since it CONFLICTS (correctly) with libc5-dev. Not everyone is going that route yet. > > The reason for my bug is to get the broken package off the ftp site. > > Before anyone else breaks their system. Guy, if everyone believes that > > 5.4.33-7 in hamm solves the problem, could you replace > > libc5_5.4.33-6.deb with libc5_5.4.33-7.deb? I won't be hazarding the > > upgrade to libc6 until tomorrow so I have no opinion that -7 is any > > good. > > The 5.4.33-6 package is _not_ broken, and should not be removed. > It rightly conflicts with libc6 due to the different utmp format between > libc5 and libc6. The 5.4.33-7 package in hamm has modified utmp routines > so it can coexist with libc6. Okay there is a different utmp format. Lets try to list the packages from libc6 that care about utmp and would actually mangle it if running with the old libc5 utmp format: login telnetd (maybe, i think it hands off to login) sshd rlogind last (well, it will show the mangled data) who/w (ditto) ftpd > There is nothing wrong here, except perhaps a lack of clear documentation. The problem is that there are many people who don't have a problem with the minor issue of possible utmp corruption (which will only happen if you install something that is compiled with libc6 and does utmp stuff), but have a MAJOR PROBLEM being FORCED to ABANDON THEIR OLD DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENT. -- Scott K. Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.gate.net/~storm/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
