RE: GNU libc confusion with symbols undefined.

[Kevin Kofler <kevin kofler chello at>]

Brown, Rodrick  wrote:
> Dave so essentially @@GLIBC_2.2.5 is the symbol version set this release
> is based on? Not necessarily having anything to do with the underlying RPM
> package version? This is what I'm getting from your explanation.

Those symbols have not changed since version 2.2.5, so the symbol version is 
still 2.2.5.

        Kevin Kofler