On Sun, Sep 9, 2012 at 6:23 PM, Carl Fink <c...@finknetwork.com> wrote: > On Mon, Sep 10, 2012 at 12:50:36AM +0100, Brian wrote: >> On Sun 09 Sep 2012 at 19:00:33 -0400, Carl Fink wrote: >> >> > Never mind, I just checked and Sid is also running 2.13. Apparently I'd >> > have >> > to use ANOTHER DISTRO to get a glibc less than 18 months old. >> > >> > Really? >> > >> > Developers: really? >> > >> > I gauess the only way to get an answer to the above rhetorical question >> > would be to file a bug against glibc--that's how to reach the glibc team, >> > right? >> >> Maybe first read the thread starting at >> >> http://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2012/07/msg00466.html > > A thread in which someone says the only way to proceed is to file a bug > against glibc, and another gives a way to reach the glibc team? > > Apparently even Sid won't be updated with anything newer until after Wheezy > releases, and not soon after that. So what do people think of Arch Linux as > my next years-worth of Linux?
Not a fan of the Arch user culture at all. Also not a fan of their crazy packaging system, to the extent that I have been exposed to it. I can't speak for others, but if I really needed a newer glibc that bad, I wold probably add Ubuntu to my sources.list, and make a hybrid. For glibc, you might end up pulling in a lot of packages... Later, when Debian gets it you can roll back into pure Debian. You have to be very comfortable with resolving crazy apt conflicts to pull this off though, which is why I can't necessarily recommend it for others. But I can't imagine needing a new glibc that badly. Cheers, Kelly Clowers -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAFoWM=8ebfvatzrtn47ruxuoaamdpzc0f+tf5tcbgrkcj-r...@mail.gmail.com
