Re: Upgrading AS, libc5 okay?

David LaMothe (
Tue, 27 Oct 1998 21:07:41 -0500 (EST)

On 27-Oct-98 Andrew Sullivan wrote:
>On Tue, 27 Oct 1998, David LaMothe wrote:
>>The RPM required glibc, yet the source compiled without
>> errors and the program works just fine. Have I just found the Holy Grail
>>after being spoon fed with RPM's?
>> So my question is can I install the latest AS from source, or for that
>>matter, any new program?
>Roughly speaking, yes.  The libc versions that you are talking about are
>(to put it terribly imprecisely) somewhat incompatible versions of the
>same functionality.  When you compile a program from source, you use these
>libraries to make the source code into a binary that will function on your
>system.  So, to get a program working, you can compile it from source, and
>get a system-specific binary.  The only caveat here is that you need all
>the libraries to which there are references in the source code.

First, thanks for all the replies; I think the fog is clearing. I suppose the
crux of my question revolved more around the libc vs glibc matter. It's my
understanding that this is not a RedHat or RPM issue, but that the whole
GNU/Linux world has just about moved to glibc. This is the reason for my
question and doubts about compiling the AS source, and whether or not it is 
intended for a glibc system, given that I have libc. I've read the whole FAQ
and changes file and found nothing. Sorry if I'm pressing the point, but I'll
first have to remove the AS RPM (I think) and that's a bit scarry. If I've
missed something or am totally out to lunch, please let me know.

Thanks again.


PS. just a quick protocol question: am I expected to cc: to the sender, or just
reply to the list?