Subject: Re: glibc versions
bryan@ak.net
Date: Tue Aug 19 2003 - 02:06:58 AKDT
On Tue, Aug 19, 2003 at 03:40:32AM -0600, tcv@ninjatech.cjb.net <tcv@ninjatech.cjb.net> wrote:
>
> > What kind of thing is GLIBC_2.2.3? Symbol? Tag? Label? What's it
> > called?
> >
> > Second, what provides it? It can't be libc itself, obviously. Does
> > ld-linux.so.2 provide that kind of thing? Or is it something else?
>
> I believe your ld.so.cache file is just out of wack. You should be able
> to fix this by running "ldconfig"
No, it's more complicated than that. I've gone around and around trying
to get things set up the way I want, and I've rendered my computer unusable
twice.
My system started out as Slackware 7.0, with glibc 2.1.2 (since upgraded
to 2.1.3). My system is now so old that certain binaries I want to run
(mozilla/firebird, nvidia driver installer, others) won't work -- they want
glibc 2.2.
So what I want to do is make glibc 2.2 available for the binaries that
need it, and keep 2.1.3 as my main system libc. What I've done this time
is compile and install 2.2.5 in a seperate directory, but I can't get
the executables to use it.
If I use my main (2.1.3) ld-linux.so.2, I get the error above. If I use
the new one (2.2.5), it insists on using the 2.2.5 directory, even though
it's NOT in /etc/ld.so.conf, and everything breaks (ls, rm, etc).
So you can see why I carefully targeted my question. I've been trying to
solve this myself, but there just isn't sufficient glibc documentation
out there.
-- Bryan Medsker bryan@ak.net--------- To unsubscribe, send email to <aklug-request@aklug.org> with 'unsubscribe' in the message body.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2a23 : Tue Aug 19 2003 - 02:07:17 AKDT