gerard at linuxfromscratch.org
Tue Mar 20 11:47:45 PST 2001
On March 18, 2001 07:06 pm, Jack Detrick wrote:
> That's just the thing--GNU is cleaning up its C stuff. Stricter ANSI
> standards compliance means that sloppy code that compiled before with
> maybe minor warnings will now _not_ compile. Some problems may be
> minor, and with just a little coding knowledge you may be able to fix
> it. However, the amount of trouble you will have is directly
> proportional to the amount of "shortcuts" the programmer(s) used when
> coding the application. I am in no way an experienced programmer, but
> it's a good rule of thumb to _not_ assume that the coder of this or that
> project abides strictly to ANSI standards.
> In the betas and prereleases before 2.95.3, the excuse not to upgrade
> was that the code wasn't yet stable. This is good. However, now that
> 2.95.3 is out, your main concern is not whether or not gcc's code is
> stable--it's the quality of code comprising the vast expanse of open
> source software out there. I'm waiting until _both_ problems are
> resolved, and until it's been proven stable. I should have done the
> same with glibc-2.2, because if I had I wouldn't have had to deal with
> these postfix segfaults these last few days.
I agree, that's why glibc-2.2.2 is not making it in the book quite yet.
By the way, I'm running a glibc-2.2.1 system here and I installed postfix as
well. The compile went just fine, it runs just great. I have skimmed through
your emails but haven't had the time to read it in detail. Have you at some
point tried to compile without any optimization?
Your postfix crashes can also be caused by a faulty Glibc installation.
Perhaps see if you can recompile Glibc and reinstall it.
-*- If Linux doesn't have the solution, you have the wrong problem -*-
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