Re: [gentoo-user] A question about emerge --info

[Andrey Falko]

On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 4:13 PM, Andrey Vul <andrey.vul@×××××.com> wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 7:09 PM, Andrey Falko <ma3oxuct@×××××.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 29, 2008 at 3:53 PM, Paul Hartman
> > <paul.hartman+gentoo@×××××.com <paul.hartman%2Bgentoo@×××××.com>> wrote:
> >>
> >> I've always been curious about something in emerge --info's output:
> >>
> >> $ emerge --info
> >> Portage 2.2_rc12 (default/linux/amd64/2008.0/desktop, gcc-4.3.2,
> >> glibc-2.8_p20080602-r0, 2.6.27-gentoo-r1 x86_64)
> >> =================================================================
> >> System uname:
> >>
> >> Linux-2.6.27-gentoo-r1-x86_64-Intel-R-_Core-TM-2_CPU_6600_@
> _2.40GHz-with-glibc2.2.5
> >> Timestamp of tree: Tue, 28 Oct 2008 00:31:02 +0000
> >>
> >> Why does it show the glibc-2.8 on the second line but glibc2.2.5 on the
> >> fifth?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Paul
> >>
> >
> > My best guess is that your kernel was compiled by a toolchain that was
> > running on glibc2.2.5
> >
> > See what happens if you recompile the kernel under the newer toolchain.
> >
> 2.6.27 uses glibc? Really?
> I'm asking lkml what's happening.
>
>
> --
> Andrey Vul
>
> A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
> Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
> A: Top-posting.
> Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
>
>
Well it doesn't use glibc per se, gcc uses the glibc.....however, his uname
-a output does look funky.

Here is mine: System uname: 2.6.24.7 x86_64 Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU 6700 @
2.66GHz

Did all underscores make it there by accident? What happens when you do a
plain uname -a?