Libraries disappearing from compat-libstdc++-296

[Bill Davidsen]

Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Gordon Messmer <yinyang <at> eburg.com> writes:
>> ...which seems odd.  I can't see how the compat-libstdc++-296 package 
>> actually provides compatibility with binaries that were built with gcc 
>> 2.96.
> 
> It does. libstdc++-libc6.2-2.so.3 is the version which actually shipped with 
> GCC 2.96. (At least the RH one. There was no formal 2.96 release, so other 
> distributions may have been shipping other 2.96 variants with different 
> libraries.)
> 
> The missing libstdc++-libc6.1-1.so.2 is actually from GCC 2.95 (or EGCS, which 
> was the project which lead to GCC 2.95 and used the same soname).
> 
> Upstreams still building their binaries with GCC 2.95 (or 2.96 for that matter) 
> should really be told to get with the times. GCC is at 4.3 now, 2.95 is just a 
> long gone memory from the distant past.
> 
Unfortunately people and companies who have critical commercial software for 
which upgrades are unavailable or unafordable remember those days well. I have 
FC4 and RH8 running in virtual machines for that very reason.

I agree that no one should be building with those libraries, but in fact people 
do use binaries already using them.

-- 
Bill Davidsen <davidsen at tmr.com>
   "We have more to fear from the bungling of the incompetent than from
the machinations of the wicked."  - from Slashdot