On Fri, 2002-05-24 at 12:03, Peter Eisentraut wrote: > > Or does the -34 mean more than just the RedHat version number? The > > Debian version is correctly named 2.2.5-6 where the -6 means that this > > is the 6th release of glibc 2.2.5 for Debian, > > Just for general amusement: I run SuSE's glibc 2.2.5-38 which contains > neither the questionable code in the original sources nor is there any > reference to it in the patch set. Go figure.
This is getting silly. Does nobody here understand that the release number is local for each distribution. Comparing them does not lead to anything. If you want to find out run rpm -q --changelog glibc | less on a RH system. Don't know what other systems provide in this direction. You'll see that the glibc in RHL7.3 contains a lot of the code from the glibc 2.3 branch. It's not named 2.2.90 because major pieces are missing. If you still don't know that version numbers are meaningless for determining feature lists you might want to consider going back to your CS101 class and revisit software configuration management. -- ---------------. ,-. 1325 Chesapeake Terrace Ulrich Drepper \ ,-------------------' \ Sunnyvale, CA 94089 USA Red Hat `--' drepper at redhat.com `------------------------
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
