Mystery of glibc-2.2.*

Marc Heerdink marc_heerdink at softhome.net
Fri Mar 2 12:02:36 PST 2001


On Fri, 2 Mar 2001 08:39:05 -0500, Gerard Beekmans wrote [Re: Mystery of
glibc-2.2.*]:
> > Thank you for the kind answer.  Do you mind if I ask you some questions?
> 
> No problem
> 
> > First of all how was you able to compile glibc with 2.4 kernel-headers?  ;)
> 
> The high ego answer: I'm the head LFS guru here, I'm supposed to get 
> everything working ;o)
> 
> Seriously, i just did it.
Sure you did. Me too... It wasn't that diffucult... I have built glibc 2.2.2
with kernel 2.4.2 headers btw without any problems. Ervin: This can be a problem
in your base system...

> > Did you use gcc-2.95.2 and binutils-2.10.1?  What optimalization flags did
> > you use?  Er yes, on what architecture?
No optimization for a maximum stable glibc; gcc 2.92.2.1, binutils 2.10.1 on
i686.

-- 
There is no programming language, no matter how structured,
that will prevent programmers from writing bad programs.
- L. Flon

Marc Heerdink
marc_heerdink at softhome.net
http://www.koelkast.net/

-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list