| 1 |
On Thu, 9 Sep 2010 21:17:52 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > hm, I never recompile glibc after a header update.... or anything |
| 4 |
> > else.... |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Me neither :-) |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> I know I should, and why. But don't. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> I think the glibc and toolchain devs think the same way and go to |
| 12 |
> extraordinary lengths to make sure stuff still works no matter hwo you |
| 13 |
> go about it. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
The elog message says nothing about anything stopping working. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Kernel headers are usually only used when recompiling your system libc, as |
| 18 |
such, following the installation of newer headers, it is advised that you |
| 19 |
re-merge your system libc. |
| 20 |
Failure to do so will cause your system libc to not make use of newer |
| 21 |
features present in the updated kernel headers. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
So your system may not be quite as good as it could be if you don't |
| 24 |
recompile glibc. My view is that it does no harm to recompile it and, all |
| 25 |
else being equal, I prefer to follow the advice from the devs. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Sleep is an excellent way of listening to an opera. - James Stephens |
Archives