| 1 |
Am 23.04.2012 04:12, schrieb Pandu Poluan: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> On Apr 23, 2012 1:09 AM, "Volker Armin Hemmann" |
| 4 |
> <volkerarmin@××××××××××.com <mailto:volkerarmin@××××××××××.com>> wrote: |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> Am Sonntag, 22. April 2012, 19:52:16 schrieb Stefan G. Weichinger: |
| 7 |
>> > Just browsed the changelog of glibc-2.15: |
| 8 |
>> > |
| 9 |
>> > http://sourceware.org/ml/libc-alpha/2012-03/msg00836.html |
| 10 |
>> > |
| 11 |
>> > When I read the NEWS section there with all that "optimized" stuff I |
| 12 |
>> > wonder if it makes any sense to rebuild packages here after |
| 13 |
> upgrading glibc? |
| 14 |
>> > |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
>> no, because it is a library. You make use of it anyway. |
| 17 |
>> |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> What about statically linked packages? |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Rgds, |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Are there actually packages out there that do this? Maybe busybox with |
| 25 |
USE="static"? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
BTW: Another reason for rebuilding (not in this case, but just to be |
| 28 |
complete) can be updates in template libraries like dev-libs/boost. Of |
| 29 |
course, this cannot happen for things written in plain C, unless we |
| 30 |
consider sys-kernel/linux-headers and friends, for example. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Regards, |
| 33 |
Florian Philipp |
Archives