Glibc 2.2.2 (again... I know)

Gerard Beekmans gerard at
Sat Mar 31 14:27:08 PST 2001

On March 31, 2001 01:55 pm, Marc Heerdink wrote:
> Hi all
> how about a warning: "We don't recommend you use glibc 2.2.2. Although it's
> a newer glibc than the version used in the book, it isn't better. Glibc
> 2.2.1 is known to work with about everything, but glibc 2.2.2 isn't. Use it
> at your own risk. Read the mailing list archives for more information." on
> top of the download page? I see too many newbies on #lfs who downloaded
> 2.2.2 (because "newer = better") and have problems with it. It's better to
> discourage using 2.2.2 before users get to downloading the packages.

Make it a general warning. Though it's already in the book that if you decide 
to try a version other than the recommended version in the book you're pretty 
much on your own. That's more than enough. If people can't read, that's their 
problem. Sure they can ask for help, but you are free to just tell them to 
get the version LFS tells them to.

Gerard Beekmans

-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-

More information about the lfs-book mailing list