Re: Oracle 9i - issues == Deal breaker

Hi Jakub,
Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 16, 2003 at 11:17:21AM -0500, Matt Pavlovich wrote:
> 
>>>On Mon, 2003-09-15 at 12:25, Matt Pavlovich wrote:
>>>
>>>>Any work around for this?  We will not standardize on RH ES if we can't
>>>>run Oracle 8 and Oracle 9.
>>>
>>>AFAIK, Oracle is committed to certification on RHEL 3 when it is
>>>released. Remember that taroon is beta code.
>>
>>Taroon being beta has nothing to do with why Oracle 8 and 9 are broken. 
>>RH broke backwards compatibility w/ GLIBC, by not exporting the
>>__ctype_b, in favor of the localized __ctype_b_loc.  Debian and other
>>distributions work just fine.  GLIBC was written with backwards
>>compatibility to avoid issues such as this.
> 
> 
> This is wrong.
> GLIBC maintains backward compatibility only with shared libraries and
> binaries, never relocatable objects or archives thereof.

If I recompile glibc 2.3.2 (the original taken from e.g. ftp.gcc.org),
then I still get __ctype_b and the others from <ctype.h> in my libc.a .
Same with the glibc 2.3.2 in Debian. I haven't tried Suse or Mandrake,
but to me it seems that only RedHat has dropped __ctype_b in libc.a .

Important question: Whats about compatibility of RedHat Linux
to other Linux distros? Does RedHat care?


Regards

Harri


--
Taroon-beta-list mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/taroon-beta-list