|
Home > Archive > Debian Developers > June 2004 > nostalgia: libc5 -> libc6 transition
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
nostalgia: libc5 -> libc6 transition
|
|
| martin f krafft 2004-06-13, 11:49 pm |
| I apologise for bringing up things of the past, but I am researching
and need your help. Back when I upgraded Bo to Hamm, it worked like
a charm. Ever since then, I have heard the "Debian was the only one
to handle the libc6 migration gracefully" many, many times.
Now, after researching quite a bit, it seems that the transition was
not so smooth after all. For instance, apparently X broke (which
I didn't notice as I wasn't using it), and third-party non-Debian
software didn't run anymore (due to -rpath pointing at the location
where the libc6 files had replaced the libc5 ones). I imagine that
if Hamm also provided updated X libraries, then the first problem
was easily fixed whereas the second could be worked around with
a hacked ld.so.
So is it true to say that Debian handled the transition nicely?
Also, along the same lines, I'd be interested to hear what about
Debian and the policy made the transition possible. Right now,
I have -rpath and SONAME-change-on-ABI-change noted, but both are
really lessons we learned from the libc6 transition, not something
that enabled it, right?
Looking forward to your input!
--
Please do not CC me when replying to lists; I read them!
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org>
: :' : proud Debian developer, admin, and user
`. `'`
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
| |
| Goswin von Brederlow 2004-06-14, 5:53 pm |
| martin f krafft <madduck@debian.org> writes:
> I apologise for bringing up things of the past, but I am researching
> and need your help. Back when I upgraded Bo to Hamm, it worked like
> a charm. Ever since then, I have heard the "Debian was the only one
> to handle the libc6 migration gracefully" many, many times.
>
> Now, after researching quite a bit, it seems that the transition was
> not so smooth after all. For instance, apparently X broke (which
> I didn't notice as I wasn't using it), and third-party non-Debian
> software didn't run anymore (due to -rpath pointing at the location
> where the libc6 files had replaced the libc5 ones). I imagine that
> if Hamm also provided updated X libraries, then the first problem
> was easily fixed whereas the second could be worked around with
> a hacked ld.so.
>
> So is it true to say that Debian handled the transition nicely?
Debian handled the transition nicely. Broken third party software
didn't. There is nothing Debian could have done to make third party
software work.
> Also, along the same lines, I'd be interested to hear what about
> Debian and the policy made the transition possible. Right now,
> I have -rpath and SONAME-change-on-ABI-change noted, but both are
> really lessons we learned from the libc6 transition, not something
> that enabled it, right?
Shlibs files that set the correct Depends on updated libraries.
> Looking forward to your input!
Maybe the gcc-3.2 transition would be a better case since that
included what was learned from the libc6 transition.
MfG
Goswin
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| martin f krafft 2004-06-14, 5:53 pm |
| also sprach Goswin von Brederlow <brederlo@informatik.uni-tuebingen.de> [2004.06.14.1335 +0200]:
> Maybe the gcc-3.2 transition would be a better case since that
> included what was learned from the libc6 transition.
That's also a good idea. I will look into it.
Let me know if you have any pointers. I was busy graduating during
the time of that upgrade.
--
Please do not CC me when replying to lists; I read them!
.''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@debian.org>
: :' : proud Debian developer, admin, and user
`. `'`
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system
Invalid/expired PGP subkeys? Use subkeys.pgp.net as keyserver!
| |
| Santiago Vila 2004-06-14, 5:53 pm |
| On Mon, 14 Jun 2004, Goswin von Brederlow wrote:
> Maybe the gcc-3.2 transition would be a better case since that
> included what was learned from the libc6 transition.
Actually, the libc6 transition was handled better than the gcc-3.2 transition.
There were lots of libc5 compatibility library packages, well-behaved
software in /usr/local/bin not using rpath didn't break after the upgrade,
and the upgrade did not require to remove old libraries from the system.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
| |
| Bill Allombert 2004-06-15, 5:54 pm |
| On Mon, Jun 14, 2004 at 02:31:10AM +0200, martin f krafft wrote:
> I apologise for bringing up things of the past, but I am researching
> and need your help. Back when I upgraded Bo to Hamm, it worked like
> a charm. Ever since then, I have heard the "Debian was the only one
> to handle the libc6 migration gracefully" many, many times.
>
> Looking forward to your input!
Maybe you would be interested to read
/usr/share/doc/debian-policy/libc6-migration.txt.gz
Also note that woody still include libc5 packages for basic
compatibility with libc5 binaries.
Cheers,
--
Bill. <ballombe@debian.org>
Imagine a large red swirl here.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
|
|
|
|
|