glibc post upgrade

[Panu Matilainen]

On Wed, 25 Aug 2004, Russell Coker wrote:

> On Tue, 24 Aug 2004 08:23, Jeff Johnson <n3npq at nc.rr.com> wrote:
> > On a parallel, multilib install battle front, /usr/bin/{glibc,libgcc}
> > have also been causing rpm pain.
> >
> > The packaging requirements are that these packages must be installable
> > into an empty
> > chroot, i.e. no /bin/sh, hence statically linked helpers.
> >
> > Unfortunately, the statically linked helpers are installed on the same
> > path, but are
> > platform dependent. The statically linked helpers are also quite
> > mysterious, e.g.
> > this isn't the first time that the rpm_t vs. rpm_script_t has been raised.
> >
> > One approach to a multilib packaging solution is to use embedded lua to
> > avoid platform
> > dependent helpers that are on conflicting paths.
> >
> > But that then means that embedded lua will be run as "rpm_t", not
> > "rpm_script_t",
> > as this is rpm running in a nearly empty chroot.
> 
> The main use for chroot operation of RPM is for the early stages of the 
> install process.  Currently we don't do this in enforcing mode so this 
> doesn't matter.
> 
> What is a LUA?

Lua is a programming language, nowadays embedded in rpm. See
http://www.lua.org/ for info on Lua itself and here
https://moin.conectiva.com.br/GustavoNiemeyer/2004-03-22 for info on how
it works from inside rpm.

	- Panu -