Re: [OFFTOPIC]: MS Porting Office to Linux?

Mattthew D. Pitts (mpitts@suite224.net)
Tue, 16 Mar 1999 19:45:20 -0500


----------
> From: Philip Blundell <philb@gnu.org>
> To: root@chaos.analogic.com
> Cc: Marc Lehmann <pcg@goof.com>; linux-kernel@vger.rutgers.edu
> Subject: Re: [OFFTOPIC]: MS Porting Office to Linux?
> Date: Tuesday, March 16, 1999 6:09 PM
>
> Richard B. Johnson wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 16 Mar 1999, Philip Blundell wrote:
>
> >> It works for you because the dynamic linkers from glibc 2.0.6 and
2.0.7
> >> are so similar; it doesn't really matter which one is used. If you
try
> >> to use a 2.1 ld.so with a 2.0.7 libc on the other hand, you will be in

> >> trouble.
> >
> >The final coment on this is:
> >
> > ftp boneserver.analogic.com /pub/downloads/linux/strace.gz
> >
> >Shows the output from `strace` as it finds and maps the files it needs,
> >using mine if it finds them first, and its files if it doesn't. This is
> >unedited and shows that it works.
>
> Did you actually read what I wrote above? It works with the particular
> version of glibc that you happen to have installed, yes. It doesn't work
with
> the version that those people having problems are using, and if you
install
> that version it will stop working for you as well.
>
> p.
In other words, glibc 2.1 is broken.

Guys, most people use libc5 or glibc 2.0.x if they've installed from a
distribution. I'm running Redhat 5.0, which uses glibc 2.0.5, so if Star
Office installs a newer glibc, no big deal. It's when people are at the
leading edge that these kind of bugs "byte" them.

Matthew D. Pitts
mpitts@suite224.net

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/