[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

libc 2.4 instead of 2.4.0 causing configure scripts to break.



Hi, all:

This is an example of what you will find in configure scripts all 
around the noosphere:


     libc_ldd=`ldd /bin/sh | grep -w libc`
     if test "x$libc_ldd" != "x"; then
       libc=`echo $libc_ldd | sed 's:.*=>[ ]::' | sed 's:[ ].*::'`
       if test "x$libc" != "x"; then
         version=`$libc | grep -i version | grep -i release | grep -i library |
sed 's:[^0-9]*\([0-9][0-9]*\.[0-9][0-9]*\.[0-9][0-9]*\).*:\1:'`
         if test "x$version" != "x"; then
           libc_version=-libc$version
           echo "$ac_t""modified Linux system type is $host$libc_version" 1>&6
         fi
       fi
     fi

   fi

What it does is determine libc version by running 
/lib/libc.so.(version) and putting that through a sed one liner
that expects three version numbers. Fedora 5 right now has binaries 
for /lib/libc.so.6 that give a two number version: 2.4

I have a software package with 38 configure scripts, all of which 
contain this stanza, and by Paul Bunyan's beard I swear, the perl 
one liner to edit all of them to change the version=... is defeating me...

Lots of developers for lots of products expect three number versions for 
libc. Should Fedora perhaps return to that convention?


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]