From: kankkune@klaava.Helsinki.FI (Risto Kankkunen) Subject: Re: Old Libc, can it be tossed? Date: 5 Jan 1993 14:02:07 GMT
>>Can the older libc.so.4.0 & libc.so.4.1 be deleted if you have libc.so.4.2?
>>Also, do I have to link libc.so.4.2 to libc.so.4.1 & 4.0 if I do?
>
>The copy of tcsh I have, which seems to be the most recent, explicitly
>asks for libc.so.4.1. If you make it a copy of libc.so.4.2, tcsh
>complains that it's incompatible. Other than tcsh, I think most
>programs use the symlink libc.so.4, and so wouldn't care if 4.1 is
>gone.
I've had a little pause with linux and just beginning to hack with it
again. I notice there are now shared libraries, and even in two flavors,
I gather. Haven't seen any good explanations of how they work, though. I
hope this hasn't been beaten to death here already or buried into the
FAQ somewhere.
What's the bussiness with jump tables? I think jump tables refer to
indirect addressing so that you can have fixed entry points to libraries
while still be able to change the implementation. Why is there the other
alternative, and is it still supported?
What is the shared library resolution mechanism? I would think that at
run time the the library with matching major number and highest minor
number would be selected. Seeing people link and copy the libraries to
different names and having had problems with programs that required 4.1,
not 4.2, it seems this isn't the case. Why? What's the use of jump
tables, if you cannot use old programs with newer libraries? How do I
know, if a new library is compatible with an older one (modulo bugs)? Is
there some internal version number in the library, or is it all in the
name?
I would have looked up answers to some of these questions from the
sources hadn't I accidentally formatted part of my hard disk the other
night and being now busy recovering what's still left there...
--
me olemme maailma tiet{v{tk| ne ett{ on jouluaika ollenkaan