This is the mail archive of the
glibc-linux@ricardo.ecn.wfu.edu
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Upgrade strategy glibc-2.1/2/n
- To: Bernd Rinn <bernd at hamilton1 dot physik dot uni-konstanz dot de>
- Subject: Re: Upgrade strategy glibc-2.1/2/n
- From: Andreas Jaeger <aj at suse dot de>
- Date: 17 Nov 1999 16:06:41 +0100
- Cc: glibc-linux at ricardo dot ecn dot wfu dot edu
- References: <19991117150422.A26340@planck.physik.uni-konstanz.de>
- Reply-To: glibc-linux at ricardo dot ecn dot wfu dot edu
>>>>> Bernd Rinn writes:
> Hi,
> I have some rather general question to the experts concerning upgrades
> from one version of glibc to another:
> 1.) Is glibc-2.x with x>1 expected to be downward compatible with
> glibc-2.1?
Yes - with one exception. Read the libc-alpha
archives from september. The archives can be accessed via
http://sourceware.cygnus.com/glibc.
> 2.) Why did you decide against introducing the major-number of a
> glibc-version into the name of the shared library
> (e.g. libc.so.6.1 instead of libc.so.6), as it has been done with
> the old linux-libc?
You mean the minor number. 6 is the major, 1 is the minor.
> 3.) Which method would you suggest to use software-packages in
> parallel, that have been dynamically linked against different
> versions of glibc? (We would like to be able to perform a 'package
> by package' upgrade over a longer period of time instead of beeing
> forced to recompile all packages at once.)
LD_LIBRARY_PATH and calling ld-linux.so directly as explained in the
FAQ.
You don't need to recompile everything at once. Read the FAQ - and
recompile just the necessary libraries and the few binaries that will
break.
Andreas
--
Andreas Jaeger
SuSE Labs aj@suse.de
private aj@arthur.rhein-neckar.de