>From 'correct' account... Sorry if you get this twice.
-Rms
-- Forwarded message --
Date: Mon, 1 Jan 2001 14:03:25 -0500 (EST)
From: Rod Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: RedHat Development Mailing List <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Corel WordPerfect
True, the changes from binutils 2.9.1.0.23 to 2.9.1.0.24 were not all that
great, but it would be nice if Red Hat would be consistent. This relates
to Red Hat 6.1.
[stewart@dystopia pub]$ rpm -q binutils
binutils-2.9.1.0.23-6
[stewart@dystopia pub]$ ld -v
GNU ld
On Fri, 10 Mar 2000, Nikolaos A. Margaritis wrote:
> Pgcc seems to be quite a promissing project. I have noticed they are
> currently using gcc 2.95.3. Is there any possibilty that we might some
> day see pgcc in rawhide? If not, why not?
Pgcc, is a Pentium optimized version. It only targets i
On Wed, 16 Feb 2000, Piotr Majka wrote:
> [root@link /root]# rpm -qf `which ldd`
> glibc-2.1.3-6
> [root@link /root]# ldd /usr/sbin/opensshd
> BUG IN DYNAMIC LINKER
> ld.so: dynamic-link.h: 57: elf_get_dynamic_info: Assertion `! "bad dynamic
> tag"' failed!
> ldd: /lib/ld-linux.so.2 exited with
On Wed, 9 Feb 2000, John Summerfield wrote:
> I have a RHL 5.0 system which I do NOT wish to update to 6.x. However, I
> would like to have glibc 2.1 on it; I'd like to run IBM's JDK on it and
> there's other software appearing that requires glibc 2.1.
>
> Is it sufficient to install these?
>
On Sat, 5 Feb 2000, Piotr Majka wrote:
> After recompiling and install I got erorr, when I try run apache
> compiled on the early version of glibc
>
> lut 4 12:22:03 link httpd: : error in loading shared
> libraries: httpd: symbol getrlimit, version GLIBC_2.1.3 not defined in
> file libc.so.6
