| On Thursday, 1 January 98, at 3:06:02 PM | Richard wrote about "need libc5 non-maintainer upgrade" > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >> Is libc5-altdev OK in its present state?
> Hmm... OK for what? You said you needed David Engel's patch, you > didn't say why :-) > The effect of this patch on libc5-altdev will be to remove the > "Conflicts: libc5-dev" line from its package description. This is > part of the scheme worked out in bug report #15859 to allow libc5 > users to install libc6 while keeping a development environment that > generates libc5 binaries. (I.e. they keep libc5-dev and all the other > libc5-based -dev packages, and do not install libc6-dev. They also > refrain from upgrading gcc. The hamm versions of gcc conflict with > libc5-dev, so that's ok.) > Is this the patch you meant? It is [based on] the one David Engel > mailed to debian-private on Monday. > I'm having some problems building it on my hamm system, by the way. > I had to install altgcc and libc5-altdev because the build process > referred to files in /usr/i486-linuxlibc1. I'm trying again now, > so it will take a couple of hours more. I have already successfully compiled(last night) libc5 on hamm. I don't, however, have the patch in question. Maybe I could do it. It took about an hour, if I remember correctly. Computers are like air conditioner. Both stop working, if you open windows. Adam Heath of Borg-Linux [EMAIL PROTECTED] Join the H.323 effort. Email http://www.debian.org - Get Your Own Linux! [EMAIL PROTECTED] with http://wwp.mirabilis.com/3375265 - Page Me the word subscribe in the body. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
