Karsten Bräckelmann put forth on 10/24/2010 6:34 PM: > On Sun, 2010-10-24 at 18:02 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: >>> Don't know about Ubuntu but Fedora 11 is already EOL'ed so there's no >>> need to fix it for that. Didn't realise that glibc 2.10 was that rare. >> >> How old is glibc 2.10? >> >> I thought Debian Lenny (which I use) was old. It's approaching two >> years since release. It currently has glibc 2.7, which was apparently >> released in 2007, 3 years ago. This would lead me to belive that glibc >> 2.10 is _very_ old. I'm not very familiar with glibc. Maybe age >> doesn't matter? > > It's a version number, generally major.minor.micro. It's not a floating > point number. > > 7 < 10, and thus 2.7 is older than 2.10.
Ahh, thanks for pointing out my error. I was thinking "2.1" not "2.10". So I'm on a much older version of glibc. I guess since I stick with distro packages I'm safe from this particular problem, since such packages are compiled against the glibc 2.7 of the distro. -- Stan
