On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, Robert Varga wrote: > > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, Eric Weigel wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 23 Mar 2000, Hamish Moffatt wrote: > > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2000 at 02:42:26AM -0300, Taupter wrote: > > > > Strange. If i can remember, Slink has libc5 compatibility libs. > > > > Why not glibc2.0 compatibility libs for potato, as RH-based distros > > > > have? > > > > > > They're both libc 6.0 -- how would ld.so know which one you wanted? > > > Any apps which run on 6.0 and not 6.1 are broken and should be fixed. > > > > > > Some things changed from 2.0 to 2.1 so that non broken binaries won't > > work. One I know about is stat, which is now a macro instead of a > > function call (breaks smbsh, even if you recompile it) > > > > Some other software doesn't work either. One I know about is IBM DB2 > > database. I don't know why it doesn't work, it just doesn't, and of > > course I don't have the source. > > > > I've thought about compatibility links, but like you said, they're both > > libc 6.0. > > > > Overall though, there doesn't seem to be a lot of broken stuff. > > > > The other one it breaks is Oracle 8.0, and one needs to convert Redhat > compatibility libraries to be able install it, and a patch from Oracle. > > I have heard it also broke Applixware, but I am not sure. > > Robert Varga
Applixware is absolutely ok. I personally run Applixware 4.4.2 on my home Potato box, on another Potato and a redhat 5.1 at the company, all of them work without any compat-packages. (Also true for Applixware 5.00M - a pre-release beta) --andor dirner -------------------- Free science and free software are just two aspects of the same complex reality: long-term human survival. Support humankind, use Linux.
