glibc 2.6

[Terry Chan]

On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 05:37:30PM +0200, Zbigniew Luszpinski wrote:
> Friday 03 of August 2007 14:01:36 Christian Riggenbach wrote:
> > i just tried gcc 4.2.1 and wonder that it won't compile. i found out, that
> > with glibc 2.6 it does. so i ask: is there a reason to stay on glibc 2.3.6?
> 
> I use glibc 2.5 which is fine (for modules I use). Glibc 2.6 broke during 
> compilation (I do not remember if it was gcc 3.4 or 4.1) so maybe it requires 
> gcc 4.2.1.  They may depend on each other :-)
> 
> AFAIK glibc 2.6.1 is current now.
> 
> BTW: I use since a year or more binutils 2.17, why not use it in moonbase?
> binutils works nice with gcc 3.4/4.1
> 
> zbiggy
-----------------------------
NO, do NOT bump binutils to 2.17 in moonbase. binutils-2.17 does NOT correctly
compile glibc-2.3.6 with or without NPTL. This comment is also marked in the
svn log for binutils/DETAILS.  This has been brought up before in the Lunar ML's
and the answer is still the same.

Terry Chan