From glibc-2.2.x to glibc-2.3.x

Greg Schafer gschafer at zip.com.au
Sat Oct 26 16:46:08 PDT 2002


On Sat, Oct 26, 2002 at 07:03:01PM +0200, Matthias Benkmann wrote:
> On Sat, 26 Oct 2002 23:21:51 +1000 Greg Schafer <gschafer at zip.com.au>
> wrote:
> 
> http://archive.linuxfromscratch.org/mail-archives/lfs-dev/2002/10/0175.html
> > 
> > He explains the situation perfectly well, even in laymans terms! 
> 
> I disagree with the layman's terms. I read this one when you posted the
> link originally and only know that I read it again in light of my
> questions do I understand it. Anyway, this explanation *is* inside
> knowledge. The LD_LIBERRY_PATH hack can (IMHO) be understood without
> external references to technobabble about old and new linker code in
> combination with certain exported hidden symbols.

Fair enuff. But I don't think your argument of having to understand what
the patch does is a strong one. Not everyone is a programmer. LFS contains
a number of patches that not everyone understands. The important thing is
that those patches are known to fix bugs and/or issues. The typical LFS'er
understands the intent of a patch, but not the nuts and bolts behind it.

Just another data point, I have downloaded the latest Rawhide SRPM and it
has all 6 symbols re-exported, just like in the proposed patch. There is a
comment in the code that says:-

"/* Temporarily exported until all .a libraries are recompiled.  */"

which pretty well confirms what Roland McGrath said.

Greg
-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list