Miquel van Smoorenburg writes ("Re: Alphas and libc dependencies"):
...
> In addition to my last message, here is an alternative I've just though
> of. Why don't we just provide dummy (eg empty) libc5, libdb1 etc
> packages, and let libc6 depend on them. Then li
Miquel van Smoorenburg writes ("Re: Alphas and libc dependencies"):
> You (Ian Jackson) wrote:
...
> > 2a. Give the package containing our version of glibc version 0 the
> > name libc5. 2b. Implement version numbers for virtual packages so
> > that we can use one
You (Ian Jackson) wrote:
> All our (ELF i386 and m68k binary) packages are built to build with a
> dependency on `libc5'.
>
> The Alpha people are not using the standard Linux libc; instead,
> they're using a version of the GNU libc, with a current major number
> of 0 by the looks of things.
In a
You (Ian Jackson) wrote:
> All our (ELF i386 and m68k binary) packages are built to build with a
> dependency on `libc5'.
>
> The Alpha people are not using the standard Linux libc; instead,
> they're using a version of the GNU libc, with a current major number
> of 0 by the looks of things.
No,
4 matches
Mail list logo
