[Context] Luatex 0.43.0 announcement

Piotr Kopszak kopszak at gmail.com
Fri Aug 28 08:14:06 CEST 2009

Right, but I'm afraid it may turn out a rather  short-term solution in
the end.  After all it's only (?) a question of linking against right
version of glibc.

2009/8/27 Mojca Miklavec <mojca.miklavec.lists at gmail.com>:
> On Thu, Aug 27, 2009 at 13:22, Piotr Kopszak wrote:
>> That's right, no one complained till now. Thanks God I never had to
>> bother about glibc compatibility but it seems there are ways to build
>> backward compatible programs on fresher Debian systems. I don't know
>> if it helps but maybe
>> http://wiki.freegamedev.net/index.php/Portable_binaries
> I don't know how to intepret their text (I don't have too much time at
> the moment either), but quoting them:
> As an example, a binary compiled on a Debian Lenny system with glibc
> 2.7 won't run on a Debian Sarge system with glibc 2.3 because the
> older glibc version doesn't have all the features found and used when
> the binary was compiled on a newer system. A binary compiled on Debian
> Sarge will run on Debian Lenny, however, thanks to backwards
> compatibility.
> In practice, all this means is that you need to compile your
> application in a sufficiently old distribution. Examples of
> distributions that have been used successfully for making portable
> binaries include old glibc 2.2.5 based Red Hat Linux versions, Debian
> Sarge, and Debian Etch.
> Mojca


More information about the binary-builders mailing list