Re: transition from 2.9 to 2.10 goes pretty smooth

[Justin Mattock <justinmattock at gmail dot com>]

On Mon, Jun 22, 2009 at 6:48 AM, Carlos O'Donell<carlos@systemhalted.org> wrote:
> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 7:33 PM, Justin Mattock<justinmattock@gmail.com> wrote:
>> After compiling glibc-20090511
>> and installing(you guys do a good job)
>> I noticed that libc-2.9.90.so
>> changes to libc-2.10.1.so.(was a bit nervous
>> about the transition from 2.9 to 2.10, but now
>> I realize it's already done).
>>
>> Anyways now that I've made the transistion from
>> 2.9 to 2.10 without even realizing, how would I go
>> and remove the old libs?(manually or run make uninstall
>> from glibc-20090504's(glibc-build directory)?
>>
>> In any case everything seems good..
>
> Installing glibc using "make install" is not a good idea, you are left
> with some applications running with cached and loaded old libc and new
> ones that have started up with the new libc.
>
> The correct way is:
> 1) Use alternate root fs.
> 2) Install glibc into target root fs using tools from alternate root fs.
> 3) Pivot into the new root fs.
>
> To fix a mistake:
> 1) Pive to old root fs.
> 2) Uninstall glibc from new root fs.
> 3) Install old glibc to new root fs.
> 4) Pivot to new root fs.
>
> I use chroot's built with debootstrap to test new glibc builds.
>
> Cheers,
> Carlos.
>

So the best way is to use a livecd
mount the partition, compile
and install libc to it's appropriate
destination.

Now uninstalling an old version of libc
I would simple just manually delete the old .so's
that are just sitting there?
Header files can probably
stay there(or delete them, and reinstall)

What about things like(for example)
If I compiled some app with
libc 2.9, and them updated libc
to 2.10 and then delete 2.9
will that app still work, or does it
need to be recompiled with 2.10?
(so the app doesn't segfault)



-- 
Justin P. Mattock