> On Sun, 14 Jun 1998, Alan Cox wrote:
>
> >> Probably _RH_ should wait a bit more to install glibc as default.
> >> Probably (I am only supposing and I can be wrong) they installed glibc
> >> since Debian installed it.
> >
> >I think you'll find Red Hat went glibc before Debian. Actually despite the
>
> So I' d like to find. The first occourence of libc6 in debian-changes is
> on Mon Mar 24 17:35:40 1997 when the maintainer of kbd from 0.92-2 to
> 0.92-3 applyed patches to compile kbd with glibc. I have not the date of
> the first libc6 Debian relase but I have the date of the upgrade from
You don't have the date because it hasn't happened yet. Debian 2.0 is due
out sometime between now and the end of next month.
Glibc conversion accounts for quite a percentage of the time - not only
because of source changes, but also to get libc5 and libc6 run alongside.
However, the date you cite is almost certainly be misleading - there are
architectures that have never (AFAIK) used libc5, and the patch above
probably came from one of those. Those Debian versions took quite a bit
longer than the difference between one release and the next.
> libc6 2.0.1-2 to 2.0.2-1 and it' s on Tue Apr 1 18:00:45 1997 and as I
> just said this is not the first release.
libc5 is definitely not in Debian 1.3.1r<whatever>, which still is the
latest released version.
MfG Kai
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu