On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 02:45:01PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 10:54:37AM -0800, Cardenas wrote: > > This sounds like a bug in glibc, as I believe that glibc 2.1.3 is > > supposed to be backwards compatible with earlier versions, for non c++ > > code. > > > > I can update the dependency to use java 1.4, but its probably the case > > that java 1.4 was compiled with gcc 3.2 and 1.3 wasn't. > > > > Can someone on the glibc team take a look at this and see if its an > > upstream bug in glibc? > > > > Apparently, the symbol __libc_recvfrom had the version GLIBC_2.0 in > > glibc 2.2.5 and in glibc 2.3.1 it has the version GLIBC_PRIVATE. > > The reason the new version is named GLIBC_PRIVATE should be pretty > apparent. Any use of a symbol which was later moved to GLIBC_PRIVATE > is a bug in the application using it. Java has to be (and has been) > fixed. > Great, thanks Daniel. Good to know we didn't just find another bug to hold back glibc. I'll just update the dependency to rely on the 1.4 jre. -- michael cardenas | lead software engineer, lindows.com hyperpoem.net | GNU/Linux software developer people.debian.org/~mbc | encrypted email preferred "Value judgements are destructive to our proper business, which is curiosity and awareness." - John Cage
Attachment:
pgp3VQL2Rm0AR.pgp
Description: PGP signature