World: r3wp

I hope that redhat has libc.so.5 or something. then there should 
be no clash. do not know what the rpm changes though. where is it?

That's what I get:
[[root-:-km1428] root]# ldd /usr/local/bin/rebol
        libm.so.6 => /lib/i686/libm.so.6 (0x4001e000)
        libc.so.6 => /lib/i686/libc.so.6 (0x40041000)
        /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x40000000)

And:
[[root-:-km1428] root]# ldd /usr/local/bin/rebcmd

/usr/local/bin/rebcmd: /lib/i686/libc.so.6: version `GLIBC_2.3' not 
found (required by /usr/local/bin/rebcmd)
        libm.so.6 => /lib/i686/libm.so.6 (0x4001e000)
        libdl.so.2 => /lib/libdl.so.2 (0x40041000)
        libc.so.6 => /lib/i686/libc.so.6 (0x40045000)
        /lib/ld-linux.so.2 => /lib/ld-linux.so.2 (0x40000000)

I used http://rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/to search for it.

Robert, actually Linux not only has not solved the DLL problem, they 
are even worse in some respects. In particular, you'd need to compile 
and distribute a different version of REBOL for each linux distro, 
not because the code is any different, but because it needs to link 
to different version of libs and so on (with different include files...); 
there is no way to ensure compatibitly.

Well, its not designed for binaries.. Interface os thru a wrapper, 
distribute the wrapper and rebol.o, problem solved..

The nice thing is, linux survives api-changes, windows not.

(because you can use different versions of the same library with 
different programs)

The best system I know, that handles all this is VMS (IIRC).

Anyway, what can I do now?

Volker: what you say is good for developers, but you can't ask normal 
users to recompile everything.

using different version of the same lib just because they have a 
different name is something you can do in any os. a newer version 
of a library should *always* be compatible with older software, so 
that you never need to have two versions.

i dont ask normal users, i ask the distro-makers. :)

staying always compatible is hard.

Well, all good. What can I do now? Still not solved.

If the rpm is for your redhat and has a 2.3, install it? after lots 
of backups maybe, i guess if the lib fails all fails. or unzip it 
and put the library somewhere else and use LD_LIBRARY_PATH. Do you 
have a link to the package?

But its nasty, i agree to dll-hell.

although if you want to run some things on nt4.0, you are similar 
lost.

hmm, how old is 7.2?

Hiow can I change my view-root under Linux?

Volker: so basically a software developer in linux does not distribute 
to users, but to distro makers, which in turn distribute to users? 
See, it's evil. Things should just run. That's how it worked on Amiga...

Robert: noone supports RH 7.2 anymore (not even RH), so basically 
you are on your own for everything you want to run there. With REBOL, 
actually, things are easy because it has very minimal dependencies 
(almost only the libc)

maybe you can make it work as Volker suggests using LD_LIBRARY_PATH. 
the good thing about linux is that, even though the design is so 
poor, you can still make it do what you want in most situations (however 
this often means hard work)

i wouldn't recommend upgrading the libc system-wide, something like 
that usually breaks everything.

Hm... ok. How to upgrade my distro without breaking everything down? 
Can this be done?

I mean, it's a system running in a data-center, and I really have 
to have this system up and running.

Gabriele: No, a software-maker distributes sourcecode to experts 
until somebody things that academic system should be marketed as 
windows-competition :)

Then yes, making everything fit together is the distributors job.

Amiga had a different design. In my experience, if you work against 
the design, you have problems. In linux case, the design is "distribute 
as source". If that works bad, its evil. If binaries works bad, thats 
bad luck..

Robert: it might be easy to pick a new box and move data. But, the 
effort to make REBOL  work is probably much smaller.

(I don't have a RH7.2 box to test this out, otherwise I'd give you 
more details on how you could make it work.)

Volker do you need RH 7? Else upgrade to Fedora 4... plug and play 
actualy, Not my Linux Linux flavor, but Fedora hits close to RH 8.. 
Or else look for fedora 3 ?? RH 7 i guess.. You install it in less 
then 15 minutes !!! just did it today..

Sorry its Robert..not volker..

I had the same problems with the last /view release 1.3 on my old 
Slackware machine.. the dependency libs where knowwhere to find... 
else then hidden deep inside gcc somewhere..

Can the datacenter give a temporary second box?

Robert: like Volker, my prefered path fro a mostly read  dataserver 
would be setup/test/populate new_data_server; stop updates on old_data_server 
switch nameserver to new_data_server

after all traffic is mirgated to new_data_server yank old_data_server

Ok, thanks. I think about it.

I have to deal this with the data-center guys.

GCC 4.1 Released

A well, this is too bad. The Debian distro is on DVD, but the computer 
does not have a DVD, only CDROM.

I've scanned the Debian docs, which are quite good, but found no 
mention of how to create a CDROM from the DVDROM.

Sniffing around, it looks like they merged all the CDROM pool files 
into a single huge main directory.

So, there goes the idea of pulling out a single CDROM image somehow... 
unless I can figure out the package dependencies.

I suppose perhaps the alternative is to build a boot floppy and install 
over FTP from the box that has the dvdrom. It's been years since 
I had to do that. Too bad Debian doesn't provide a little script 
to cut CDROMS from the DVD. I've got to guess I'm not the only person 
with this issue.

And you have to wonder why they need a 10GB distro. "Just give me 
the main system and libs please" - no bloatedness, thanks.

You could go with Knoppix or Ubuntu, which are both debian-based, 
but fit on a floppy.

whoa

cd rom, not floppy.

Wow. Big difference there, total brain fart.

I've got Ubuntu already.