View Single Post
Posts: 3,296 | Thanked: 4,325 times | Joined on May 2011 @ Poland
#32
Originally Posted by misiak View Post
There are some reported backwards compatibility breaking changes in eglibc (as reported in few other projects, e.g. http://us.generation-nt.com/answer/b...205129881.html and http://osdir.com/ml/debian-glibc/2012-11/msg00045.html ).

Taking that to consideration, together with the fact that Debian aims to provide backwards compatibility when possible, I have to ask one question which may sound silly Did you try to apply standard Debian patches (e.g. ones from http://packages.debian.org/pl/source/sid/eglibc , file eglibc_2.17-6.debian.tar.xz , directory debian/patches/arm) to the sources and then build and check the Calendar? AFAIK Maemo's eglibc was based on Debian's version, so I would suspect there might be (just might, I'm not saying that for sure) a little chance that, after aplying Debian's fancy patches, the new version will be binary compatible with the previous version. The plain eglibc is known to have ABI incompatibilities even between versions used in Fremantle (2.5) and Harmattan (2.10.1) (see http://linuxtesting.org/compatibilit...at_report.html , "libc.so.6" section and further details for more info).
Maybe some patches from Maemo 2.5 would need to be applied...
__________________
If you want to support my work, you can donate by PayPal or Flattr

Projects no longer actively developed: here
 

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to marmistrz For This Useful Post: