David Engel writes ("Re: aout-* packages"):
> This brings up a good question. Do we really want to provide new,
> a.out versions of *all* development packages, even if they don't
> contain any shared libraries? Not doing so might be a good way to
> encourage all develo
> > The kernel can still be compiled in a.out format. The a.out
> > development tools aren't completely going away. They just won't be
> > the default. If you really want to compile 1.2.13 in ELF format, I
> > suggest you politely request Linus to update it one last time.
>
> As I remember, fro
On Fri, 17 Nov 1995, David Engel wrote:
> The kernel can still be compiled in a.out format. The a.out
> development tools aren't completely going away. They just won't be
> the default. If you really want to compile 1.2.13 in ELF format, I
> suggest you politely request Linus to update it one la
> > As far as I can see, the following packages will have to go through this
> > transition: electric-fence, libdb (part of libc4, but not of libc5; I'll
> > take
> > a look at this), libg++, libident, libncurses.
>
> add flex (for libfl)
This brings up a good question. Do we really want to p
> This brings up a potentially important question:
>
> 1.2.13 won't compile under ELF by default, and though there have been
> many threats of 1.2.14 it has yet to materialize. Are we going to push
> forward with 1.3.x, or stick with 1.2.13 and patch?
The kernel can still be compiled in a.out
> > Are these new aout-* packages going to stay the same name forever?
> Probably as long as we support a.out.
>
> > And also,
> > are there going to be elf-* packages under the debian-1.0 tree too?
>
> The elf-* packages were experimental packages, for those main
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (J.H.M.Dassen) said:
> As far as I can see, the following packages will have to go through this
> transition: electric-fence, libdb (part of libc4, but not of libc5; I'll take
> a look at this), libg++, libident, libncurses.
add flex (for libfl)
> This brings up a potentially important question:
>
> 1.2.13 won't compile under ELF by default, and though there have been
> many threats of 1.2.14 it has yet to materialize. Are we going to push
> forward with 1.3.x, or stick with 1.2.13 and patch?
I run 1.3 kernels myself, but they are not
On Fri, 17 Nov 1995, J.H.M.Dassen wrote:
> Since 1.0 is going to be ELF (meaning that all its binaries will be ELF, and
> that it compiles for ELF by default), with backward compatibility to compile
> and run a.out binaries, new packages are being made, that put their ELF stuff
> in the standard
> Are these new aout-* packages going to stay the same name forever?
Probably as long as we support a.out.
> And also,
> are there going to be elf-* packages under the debian-1.0 tree too?
The elf-* packages were experimental packages, for those maintainers that
wanted too look ahea
Hi..
Are these new aout-* packages going to stay the same name forever? And also,
are there going to be elf-* packages under the debian-1.0 tree too? It's a
little confusing having "aout-gcc-2.6.3-4.deb" and "gcc-2.7.0-2.deb" - is the
2.7 ELF?
I think I read a
11 matches
Mail list logo
