|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
Re: [PLUG] RedHat 7.1 glibc2.1 Backward compat - revisited
|
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 12:08:47PM -0400, Fred K Ollinger wrote:
> I'm not going to add to the debate, just remark that a broken
> compiler can easily fixed by downloading the 'approved' ver and compiling
> that w/ the 'broken' compiler. Then use the 'fixed' compiler and compile
> again and reinstall. Now everything should be compliant. Someone please
> tell me if this is wrong.
>
> Also, how can a compiler be incompatible w/ a kernel. What does
The kernel needs the compiler to align bits properly, inline functions
properly, initialize static values in the binary properly and hundreds
of other things. If it doesn't do this, your kernel won't boot or it'll
crash at random places. The gcc that RH ships doesn't do these things
properly. So not only is the binary kernel it produces wrong, the binary
libs are wrong too. Think of it as a translator during a peace talk,
if the translator fubars the translation you could get WWIII.
> this mean. Does this mean that binaries it produces don't run on the
> kernel? Then it truly is broken and you need new rpm to fix unless
> there's some other way of bootstrapping. If the later scenerios are the
> case then rh is total crap. If not, then it's just slightly broken. Not
> that I'm defending _anyone_. I would just like to get the technical stuff
> worked out. I take all my advocacy arguments to cola. I like this group
> b/c there's little advocacy so I'm learning more instead of getting worked
> up. :)
______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group - http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug
|
|