Ubuntu

Is Eglibc binary compatible with glibc in all cases

Asked by tomdean

I was working on glibc to fix a problem in math, ctanh.

I apt-get source libc6. To my surprise,
Get:1 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com karmic-updates/main eglibc 2.10.1-0ubuntu16 (dsc) [2984B]
Get:2 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com karmic-updates/main eglibc 2.10.1-0ubuntu16 (tar) [23.3MB]
Get:3 http://us.archive.ubuntu.com karmic-updates/main eglibc 2.10.1-0ubuntu16 (diff) [2758kB]
Fetched 26.0MB in 2min 42s (161kB/s)
gpgv: Signature made Thu Dec 24 03:46:11 2009 PST using DSA key ID 0F932C9C
gpgv: Can't check signature: public key not found
dpkg-source: warning: failed to verify signature on ./eglibc_2.10.1-0ubuntu16.dsc
dpkg-source: info: extracting eglibc in eglibc-2.10.1
dpkg-source: info: unpacking eglibc_2.10.1.orig.tar.gz
dpkg-source: info: applying eglibc_2.10.1-0ubuntu16.diff.gz

Is eglibc exactly binary compatible with glibc in all cases?

Do all changes to glibc get reflected in eglibc?

Why do we have a different libc?????

Question information

Language:
English Edit question
Status:
Answered
For:
Ubuntu Edit question
Assignee:
No assignee Edit question
Last query:
Last reply:
Revision history for this message
Murukesh Mohanan (murukesh) said : 		#1

Considering you earlier problem, I'd say you'd want to work with eglibc, since Karmic uses it instead of glibc (I dunno why, the wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Embedded_GLIBC) article says its coz of development issues). I dare say you should read the EGLIBC FAQ (http://www.eglibc.org/faq) for the rest of the answers.

Can you help with this problem?

Provide an answer of your own, or ask tomdean for more information if necessary.

To post a message you must log in.