Filippo Giunchedi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Thu, Jan 23, 2003 at 02:38:47PM +0000, James Troup wrote: > > Filippo Giunchedi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > > > i got my autossh package sponsored by martin f krafft (thanks!), now > > > Dan Christensen pointed me out [1] that autossh works fine also in > > > testing and I've tried it too. Should I force libc6 >= 2.2.5 and let > > > autossh hit testing? there is any good reason against this pratice > > > for packages built with libc6 > 2.2.5 in mind? > > > > You can't force the version of libc used on any other architecture > > than the one you build the package for, so trying this will do you no > > good WRT testing. > Sorry but I can't really understand, writing a debian/shlibs.local file > overriding libc6 version is possible and supposed to work. Is it wrong or bad > pratice? I know it isn't the Right Way, I'm only trying to understand what I'm > probably missing.
Sorry but it's stupid. If you don't do it for every architecture, it doesn't get you anywhere. If you're going to do it for every architecture, you have to have tested it. Can/would you really check it on all 11 architectures? Not to mention some architectures don't necessarily call their libc package "libc6", there's at least libc0.2, libc1, libc6.1 in addition to libc6. Are you going to handle that with your shlibs.local file? Basically, it's a lot of effort, which you're inevitably either going to skip or screw up for almost zero gain. I'm sure there's far more worthwhile things you could be doing with your time. -- James -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
