| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Binary compatibilityBinary compatibilityPosted Jul 10, 2009 18:31 UTC (Fri) by anton (subscriber, #25547)In reply to: Small problem for Linux ? Sure. Big problem for Linux user? Of course. by nye Parent article: Google Chrome OS and the community Yes, my binary of Mosaic 2.7b5 still works on my Debian Lenny AMD64 system, and it also understands current HTTP (but often likes to download instead of display HTML pages due to charset issues (IIRC)). The binary is from 1998 and is statically linked. A Mosaic binary from 1994 just segfaults, as well as all the other ZMAGIC binaries (1994-1995) I have lying around. The QMAGIC binaries (1995-1997) all report "can't load dynamic linker '/lib/ld.so nor /usr/i486-linux/lib/ld.so'" and could probably be made to work by copying the appropriate file to the right place (plus any libraries needed). Then we get into the ELF era (since 1998), and the binaries (e.g., ssh 1.2.25) work if (compatible versions of) the libraries they use are present; for that ssh binary the libraries are libnsl.so.1 libcrypt.so.1 libutil.so.1 libc.so.6 /lib/ld-linux.so.2, which came with the libc6-i386 package on Lenny. Not bad. I usually preserve old distributions I used to use, so I can easily copy the old libraries to my new distribution if I need them (or maybe just include the old library directories in ld.so.conf). I have not needed to do that for quite some time, though.
(Log in to post comments)
Binary compatibility Posted Jul 11, 2009 10:04 UTC (Sat) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link]
I think you have to turn off address space randomization to get old ZMAGIC
binaries to work (but I'd not be surprised if they'd rotted completely: does anyone other than Alan Cox run them anymore? :) )
Binary compatibility Posted Jul 13, 2009 13:26 UTC (Mon) by anton (subscriber, #25547) [Link] Address-space randomization was turned off in my experiments, so that alone is not enough. Apart from such experiments I don't run them anymore.
|
|
||||||||||||