Date: Wed, 10 Jul 1996 09:50:13 -0500 (CDT) From: mikebo@tellabs.com To: jkh@time.cdrom.com Cc: mikebo (Mike Borowiec), bugs@freebsd.org Subject: 2.1-960627-SNAP == 2.1.5 Beta ? (fwd) Message-ID: <199607101450.JAA23359@sunc210.tellabs.com>
next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This is the third time I'm sending this e-mail because I never received the courtesy of a reply. I'm concerned that I can do a generic FTP install and get a mish-mash of system libraries which causes major problems. Given that a 2.1.5R release is imminent, doesn't anyone else think this is a problem? I didn't think 2.1-960627-SNAP was "on the 2.2 track"... toybox> uname -a FreeBSD toybox.hq.tellabs.com 2.1-960627-SNAP FreeBSD 2.1-960627-SNAP #0: Fri Jun 28 09:40:31 1996 jkh@whisker.cdrom.com:/usr/src/sys/compile/GENERIC i386 toybox> ls -l libc* -r--r--r-- 1 bin bin 497710 Jun 28 03:44 libc.a -r--r--r-- 1 bin bin 403106 Jul 3 1994 libc.so.1.1 -r--r--r-- 1 bin bin 466907 Jan 25 1995 libc.so.2.0 -r--r--r-- 1 bin bin 435248 Apr 27 16:57 libc.so.2.2 Jordan - You wrote: > > Jordan, if you want me to run anything against my system before I > > blow it away (in case you were curious as to how the installation > > gave me a bogus libc.so) just ask, but soon. ;v) > > Not necessary - you're on the 2.2 track and I'm not really dealing > with problems there until 2.1.5 is out the door, so don't wait on me > here.. :-) > Ummm.... I'm confused. I thought 2.1-960627-SNAP *was* 2.1.5 Beta 1. I thought I was doing a 2.1.5 Beta 1 install. Didn't I? - Mike -- -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Michael Borowiec - mikebo@tellabs.com - Tellabs Operations Inc. Senior Member of Technical Staff 4951 Indiana Avenue, MS 63 708-512-8211 FAX: 708-512-7099 Lisle, IL 60532 USA --------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199607101450.JAA23359>