Re: Are libc-2.3.2.so & libc-2.2.5.so compatible?
From: mark (mark_2811nospam_at_excite.com)
Date: 04/27/04
- Next message: KR Williams: "Re: BayStar asks money back from SCO, SCO share 30% down."
- Previous message: Paul Pluzhnikov: "Re: Are libc-2.3.2.so & libc-2.2.5.so compatible?"
- In reply to: Paul Pluzhnikov: "Re: Are libc-2.3.2.so & libc-2.2.5.so compatible?"
- Next in thread: Nils O. Selåsdal: "Re: Are libc-2.3.2.so & libc-2.2.5.so compatible?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 26 Apr 2004 20:43:53 -0600
On Mon, 26 Apr 2004 19:19:51 -0700, Paul Pluzhnikov wrote:
> Måns Rullgård <mru@kth.se> writes:
>
>> Then your only option is to build the program on a system with glibc
>> 2.2.5.
>
> Well, that's not the *only* option. The other popular options are:
>
> - install glibc-2.2.5-based development toolset in a croot()ed
> environment, and rebuild your program in it, or
>
> - install gcc as a Linux/x86/glibc-2.3.x => Linux/x86/glibc-2.2.x
> cross-compiler (details in gcc source distribution).
>
> Cheers,
I ended up installing a different toolchain, now it's working great.
Thanks!
Mark
- Next message: KR Williams: "Re: BayStar asks money back from SCO, SCO share 30% down."
- Previous message: Paul Pluzhnikov: "Re: Are libc-2.3.2.so & libc-2.2.5.so compatible?"
- In reply to: Paul Pluzhnikov: "Re: Are libc-2.3.2.so & libc-2.2.5.so compatible?"
- Next in thread: Nils O. Selåsdal: "Re: Are libc-2.3.2.so & libc-2.2.5.so compatible?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|