[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: comiling error in exec
From: |
Michael Banck |
Subject: |
Re: comiling error in exec |
Date: |
Fri, 13 Feb 2004 20:47:19 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.4i |
On Fri, Feb 13, 2004 at 08:24:58PM +0100, Alfred M. Szmidt wrote:
> > I was thinking more along the lines so that the user will know
> > that he/she is using a old version of libc. Because otherwise we
> > would have to add each feature we depend on into our
> > configure.in.
>
> Or just write it off.
>
> If you mean that it is not worth it, then maybe. But then we will
> have users complaining about the Hurd not compiling, etc. And I think
> it would be more useful to get rid of those questions with a simple
> check in configure.in.
Why not just mentioning the required version/date of glibc in INSTALL?
It already says:
|The Hurd version 0.2 has been verified to work with versions 2.0.3 and
|2.0.4 of the GNU C library. (But note that version 2.0.3 has some
|easily-fixed bugs in compilation for the i386-gnu target.)
Michael
Re: comiling error in exec, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2004/02/12
- Re: comiling error in exec, Roland McGrath, 2004/02/12
- Re: comiling error in exec, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2004/02/13
- Re: comiling error in exec, Roland McGrath, 2004/02/13
- Re: comiling error in exec, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2004/02/13
- Re: comiling error in exec, Roland McGrath, 2004/02/13
- Re: comiling error in exec, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2004/02/13
- Re: comiling error in exec,
Michael Banck <=
- Re: comiling error in exec, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2004/02/13
Re: comiling error in exec, M. Gerards, 2004/02/12