fp install fails, "no version information available" error and install is aborted.

[Fairlight]

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 10:13:13AM -0400, Kenneth Brody thus spoke:
> fPTech doesn't "dictate" library versions -- gcc does.
> 
> Perhaps you've never built a binary on Linux using gcc?  I just
> compiled "hello world", and even it requires a specific glibc
> version or later.

Seriously?  I probably have -way- more compile time clocked on Linux than
you do, given the amount of hand-rolled security updates I do.  I also
started before Slackware was even v1.0, and used to compile -every single
kernel- from 0.99.9pld through 1.2.5 or so.  That comment was absolutely
pathetic, even as an ad hominem.

I just compiled hello.c myself, and you do -not- need to specify a glibc
version, just as you never have.  I checked, just to make sure the gcc team
didn't do something bizarre.  

Yes, of -course- your resultant binary will end up using whatever glibc is
installed (unless you compile statically).

My whole -point- is that fP Tech is -not- making people aware of what they
need in terms of libraries and versions of those libraries -before- they
try installing.  Listing libtermcap.so.2 is the only thing which was
present towards that end on the website, as of last night.

If you -really- want to nitpick on the word dictate, well yes, it's
accurate.  You apparently choose to build only on certain versions of
certain distributions, so you -are- inherently dictating what is required,
in about the same way as you claim gcc is dictating the glibc version
above.

You dictate prerequisites via your build choices, but you don't bother
telling consumers up-front what they need.  Brilliant.

mark->
-- 
Audio panton, cogito singularis.