4 ms·
You would think so, but it's not true. I struggled with this for a few days before giving up (after finding articles which stated that this is really going wher
by 21 8y ago
You would think so, but it's not true. I struggled with this for a few days before giving up (after finding articles which stated that this is really going where nobody went before)
> Static linking of glibc is not supported on Red Hat Enterprise Linux.
https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2016/02/17/upgrading-the-gnu-c-library-within-red-hat-enterprise-linux/ https://developers.redhat.com/blog/2016/02/17/upgrading-the-...
- isostatic 8y agoI don't pretend to know a lot about linking files, but I just checked an old static ffmbc binary I had lying around :/tmp$ file ffmbc ffmbc: ELF 64-bit LSB executable, x86-64, version 1 (SYSV), statically linked, for GNU/Linux 2.6.15, BuildID[sha1]=...., stripped :/tmp$ ldd ffmbc not a dynamic executable It runs on the following libc versions: ldd (GNU libc) 2.12 (Centos 6.9) ldd (Ubuntu EGLIBC 2.19-0ubuntu6.14) 2.19 (ubuntu 14.04) ldd (Ubuntu GLIBC 2.23-0ubuntu10) 2.23 (Ubuntu 16.04) I'm fairly sure it ran on distributions as old as ubuntu 8.04