On 12/19/2012 10:29 AM, Chow Loong Jin wrote:
> A simple glance at packages.ubuntu.com or apt-cache show libc6
> would have confirmed that libc6 >= 2.7 (2.15 to be exact) does
> indeed exist on Ubuntu 12.10, contrary to what you claimed in the
> bug description.
Gah, you're right... even though numerically 2.7 is greater than 2.15,
it's earlier in version numbers... I kept thinking what the hell,
that version is from the future!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://www.enigmail.net/
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 12/19/2012 10:29 AM, Chow Loong Jin wrote:
> A simple glance at packages.ubuntu.com or apt-cache show libc6
> would have confirmed that libc6 >= 2.7 (2.15 to be exact) does
> indeed exist on Ubuntu 12.10, contrary to what you claimed in the
> bug description.
Gah, you're right... even though numerically 2.7 is greater than 2.15,
it's earlier in version numbers... I kept thinking what the hell,
that version is from the future!
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- www.enigmail. net/
Q0eXYAAoJEJrBOl T6nu7545gIALef0 Ne2eIY/ jdudrIkoSjE1 BpAwYuGQ464HBYw PuTTSBQZKBog6Ek 8/ToNpBCGqs1HqO nrNnCDTSFe RYUlvUqr/ kVidlAKnnZQj6PY QFfYQ2IXJ9EuiSg vFWNtpEjuq qFs1UgRgKw2XEPQ 5ZIGCuxqbMB8VJz 3MLIMENqPOihEoo HXWR6OoFR PJLShZTqr2ZwT0P TRnEeBsHbswSOzz SRkNR8a8FtdZEm5 K+xb 1MIQhicWDgi9wFa m31zNFoq4ioBRLv KWPRu2u8Z6xWWGT GoE=
Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with undefined - http://
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJ
/GZW0Uvq/
c2vGNNbg2wIwS72
7G5rhMkln+
XWI985dFfx4Aqx9
K0wEDkiuPvfIG09
=09+k
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----