Should binary-only SW be written against glibc ?

Burchard Steinbild bs at suse.de
Fri Aug 28 07:17:28 PDT 1998


Hi,


On Fri, 28 Aug 1998, Davide Bolcioni wrote:

> Hi everybody,
>   first linux list with no new messages for one day, so I thought I'd
> submit one. I am not an active Linux developer, but have been observing
> for some time (administering part time also). The question is in the
> subject: maybe developers wishing to distribute binary-only applications
> should be encouraged to write against a library whose evolution is not
> as fast as the evolution of glibc.

There was a decission in lsb a while ago, but since lsb is reseted, it has
to be discussed again.

The plans were to make a libc with a special so name (e.g.
libc.lsb.1.).  This libc.lsb was meant to be a special glibc version.

So distribution vendors don't have to stay with the library for years, but
software from ISV can live longer than one summer :)


I still believe, this should be done this way.


cu
      ...bs

---
  My tip for this evening: Kuti, Fela: Afrobeat
---
  Burchard Steinbild, S.u.S.E. GmbH, Gebhardtstr. 2, 90762 Fuerth, Germany
  Tel: +49-911-74053-0,       Fax: +49-911-7417755,      Email: bs at suse.de





More information about the lsb-discuss mailing list