On Sat, Dec 31, 2005 at 08:01:37PM -0600, Matt England wrote: > I'm still looking for any guidance on this topic. > > In summary: > > Can one run Sarge-built binaries on Woody?
As I tried to explain at length in my previous post: in general no, except with massive tweaking (either at build-time, or at run-time). > Can one run Woody-built binaries on Sarge? Somewhat less problematic, but still no guarantee... > > In the same context, how well would Debian 2.x-built binaries work on 3.x > and vice versa? Same thing... for exactly the same reasons. > > For what it's worth, I soon have to establish some Debian > binary-to-test-system rev-control policies before I got into first round > test on my group's software. Essentially, static linking is the only easy way that would get you reasonably far with what you seem to have in mind. But then again, this cannot really be recommended as a general measure against the need to rebuild (when things have diverged too far) -- after all, there _are_ reasons that dynamic linking had been introduced many years ago... Almut PS: a few meta comments. It might help to bring about more useful answers * if you followed up by replying to what people have said so far, instead of merely restating the original question. * if you defined what exactly you mean by sarge-built, etc. A "sarge-built binary" could be anything from the very binaries as they come with the stock debian packages, to what might pop out of a highly tweaked build process, which simply happens to be performed on a sarge machine... Depending on what you mean, answers would vary widely. * if you elaborated somewhat on the motivation behind your question, i.e. which problem are you trying to solve? any specific application you have in mind? (if so, what type of), and so on. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
