But any holes that arise will quickly be closed. I sincerely doubt that there will ever be the danger of viruses for Linux as there is for WinXX. Anyhow, Unix has been around for almost 30 years, and it has many users and developers, by your reasoning, there should already be a large proliferation of Viruses for Unix, and hence Linux. I don't see that, and I doubt I ever will
There are few, if any viruses that will affect unix. There is the occasional worm, but even those are few and far between. You might not be imune from spreading the virus, but it won't affect you. If you are really nuts about being immune, and protecting your data, Run VMS. The point is, Stop running crap os's and their crap apps, and you won't have to put up with the Crap. I run Linux 24-7-365, and it's on the net unsupervised all of the time. With a little reading, I have been able to secure it to a level where I am comfortable that it won't be hacked. It's been tried, but no one has been able to get in(You just have to love SSH). If you are going to drive on Public streets, learn to drive. If you are going to be on Public nets, learn to protect yourself. Don't expect the Govt to hold your hand, and don't expect your OS vendor to protect you. Your safety is your responsibility. As for the author of the Virus, I personally feel that 10-15 years is a bit heafty for a prank. Why put murderers away for only 5 to 7, and put a talented programmer away for 10-15. Something isn't right here. Anyway, that's my take on it
This April fools sh*t is getting out of hand. I had several friends of mine call last night to tell me about all of this cr*p. I had to slowly explain to them that it was April Fools day. I am getting sick of having to explain to the fools that it's just a joke. We should be careful here, some people just won't "get" it. Someone might actually fly off the "hook" on this stuff.
Assholes. I for one, am glad that ESR is staying on board. However I do have one suggestion. Just as you should not go around sniffing....., you should in turn ignore most people's opinions. Most of what is posted on SlashDot, and related discussion groups is just trash, and not worth the stress it can cause you. Stay focused on your goals, ignore the ranting, and keep up the good work. The same goes to RMS, Linus, Alan, and the rest of the gang. Ignore the trash, there will always be more of it than should be. People love to complain, but rarely like to compliment. It is an odd habit of us Humans that we desire aproval, but tend to only dish out disapproval. Hmmm, well, anyway, know that your efforts are appreciated by the silent majority of us. Keep up the excellent work.
Either it should be GPL, BERKLEY, or keep it proprietary. Too many licenses will cause confusion, headache, and unecessary litigation. If you can't afford to release under one of the two above mentioned Licenses, then keep it to yourself. Anyhow, that's my 2cents worth.
Red Hat's unwavering support of the GPL, and their strict insistance on applying it to all that they do, leads me to believe that they are not, nor will they ever, try to take "ownership" of the Linux movement. Red Hat has done a fine job, and whether you like to admit it or not, if it wasn't for them, Linux awareness would be two or three years behind where it is today. Red Hat was one of the first vendors to support multiple platforms. They put up the money to help with GNOME, and now also KDE. They fund the development of graphics card drivers, and they are partially responsible for much of the recent Kernel development(Alan Cox). I don't see the other vendors stepping to the plate like this. Don't get me wrong, I like SuSE, SlackWare, Debian, etc... But I am somewhat dissapointed with other vendors willingness to give back to Linux.
Hmmm, I would have to agree with this article. To be a hacker, one should know Unix. We should remember that Unix is the grandfather of almost all modern OS's. How many operating systems have their bases in VMS, hmmmm, let's see, that would be Win NT. Well, we know how that is turning out. No offense to VMS, I actually like it quite a bit, but I cut my teeth on Unix, and have learned my trade from Unix. I also agree with the dedication part. Programming is not easy. It requires that you think about your world in a very unique way. I am a Mechanical Engineer by training(though I work as a C/C++ programmer), and I find that programming is much like Engineering. It requires that you look upon your surroundings with analytical eyes. As with engineering, you don't learn everything on your own. Instead, you draw upon the knowledge of your peers and seniors. Coding is the engineering of the modern age. Just as many cultures revered fine engineering(the Romans and Greeks), so does ours revere coding. We coders may not yet have the status of famous Architects and Designers, but our time is comming. Programming is the tool that will solve tommorrows pressing questions. The human Genome project, Space flight, Tissue engineering and so on, all rely heavily on computers, and in particular, code. Our ability to model our world is directly tied to our ability to manipulate it. Computers are the tools to help model, and coders are the ones that make it possible(No offense to you EE's out there, we have love for you too). Anyhow, perhaps I digress from my original thought. To make a long story short, I thought the article was well written, and presents a true picture of what it means to be a hacker.
Hmmm, Let's look at it this way. You could, if you wanted to, order a pizza in Chicago, even if you lived in Austin. However, what would be the point. If it were not a prank, then there would be no purpose. A pizza is a material object. You have to be there, or near by to get the pizza.
So, what does this have to do with IPP. Well, even if I could print in Chicago, even though I live in Austin TX, what would be the point. Why would I want to be able to print in Chicago. I can't feesably get the printout. If I wanted to send a document, I would e-mail a PDF, or text document, or whatever. Then the recieving party could choose to print it if they wanted to. There would be no need for me to be able to force their printer to print it. The only use for IPP in this sense, would be to cause trouble.
Now IPP might be usefull for Intranets. You could use IPP to print a document down the hall, and then get up and go get it. However, I can already do this with Post Script, and lpr. Almost all printers understand Post Script. I don't see the need to have IPP, if what I have already works well, and is cross platform capable. As it is, PS is available for all platforms.
Anyway, I have to go now, I am going to order a Pizza in Deleware. I wonder if they will guarantee 30 minute delivery?
Hmmm, this thing and the way it is marketed just lends itself to dirty jokes. Just be ware that too much "Twidling" has been reported to cause hairy palms. I have tested this theory for the past several years, but results are inconclusive. There is no excessive hair on my palms, but maybe that is because of all the "Twidling". Hmmm, I guess I will never know.
Don't forget MIPS and PPC in there. Note that Linux runs well on all of these architectures. Linux runs in 32 bit, 64 bit, and rumor has it, there is a 128bit version floating around, though I doubt it right now. NT runs on INTEL and ALPHA. Intel has little if any footing in the Server class arena, and NT Alpha is all but a forgotten cause. If NT claims to run on Server class hardware, then shouldn't it run on hardware other than X86 hardware? NT Alpha is tiny, over 80% of NT is on X86. I guess NT is really only a Desktop Operating system.
Hmmm, This is a very interesting article, It is interesting to see how people from a different era viewed these issues. I waiver in my own opinion. On one hand, I can see the value of Open ideas with no copyright or protection, but on the other, I see these problems. First, if one could not patent a process, it would be impossible to compete. Let us say that you invented a better wheel. You are an everyday joe, not much money to your name. Now, GoodYear comes along, finds out about your wheel, and then starts producing it, at great profit for themselves. What recourse do you now have. If there is no IP law to protect you, you have no recourse. IP law was designed in part to protect those with few resources from the infringement of those with large amounts of resource. A lack of IP law would actually favor the large corporations, not the average joe. If you can't protect your invention, there is no incentive to invent. On the flip side of that coin what if INTEL or DEC could not patent parts of their design, how could they ever recover the millions, if not billions that were spent to develope their chips. If they couldn't, chances are that we would still be running on vacuum tubes, if even that. It works both ways. IP law is designed to protect the single inventor as well as the Multi Billion dollar corporation. It is not perfect, but it is an attempt to protect the motivation to invent.
Now, where I would agree with the article is in the area of software. I believe that software is only copyrightable, and not patentable. No one should be able to patent an algorithm. Would it not be absured if Shakespear had a patent on tragedy. You could view tragedy as an artistice algorithm. Certaintly, he should be able to protect his original works, but not the general idea behind them. Same for software. Microsoft should be able to copyright the software that enables Cascading Style sheets, but they should not be able to patent Cascading Style sheets themselves Anyway, that's my 2cents worth
I have used Red Hat, SuSE, and Debian. I see no real differences between any of the modern version s of these. Back when Red Hat switched to glibc, that is when everyone thought Red Hat was breaking compatability. In reality, it was a smart move, and everyone else soon followed. In general, the only real differences between systems is how the files are laid out. For the most part, they are all in the same place from distro to distro, with a few minor, but noticiable differences. Most of the necessary libraries are present, along with all of the necessary tools. The only reason SuSE RPM's and Red Hat RPM's are different is due to file layout, and some minor differences in XF86 setups between the distros. You can, and I have, install SuSE rpm's on Red Hat, and vice versa. It takes a bit more configuring, but it really isn't all that hard for most things. In general, I don't see Red Hat trying to bully the Linux market. They are the leaders because they have taken the time to develop(GNOME, RPM, Kernel Development through Alan Cox etc...) and market Linux. They have earned their position. If they should try to do anything stupid, SuSE would eat their lunch.
Hmmm, you are right to point out that *BSD was copied quite a bit, but as a pure system in itself, it never was very successfull. Linux, on the other hand, has become quite successfull on it's own. This, I think, is more important than having everyone copy your code, but not ever pay you for it. Berkley,I am sure, got paid. But the actuall students that helped develop it were left floating in the breeze, so to speak.
I see business and OSS as a good pair. No offense, but one of the reasons that *BSD's never got very far is that they never attracted business. *BSD's have been around longer than Linux, and they are just as stable, but why have they always been religated to just being a passing hobby. The way they are licensed never attracted commercial attention, therefore they never got more than a very small foothold in the commercial sector. They remain primarily a college student's hobby.
On the other hand, the GPL was designed to explicitly give entry into the commercial sector. It allows, and even encourages commercial pursuit of the code which is licensed under it. In order to attract and keep active talent, you ultimately need to have a way to make money with the code. You can't realisticly expect programmers to continue to add to the code after college, if they can't make money. Once you start pursuing a career, and having children, your philosiphical outlook on "Free" software begins to take a second row seat to these more pressing needs. GPL'd software allows business to make money for their efforts, which means that developers get paid. Whether you like to admit it or not, $$$$ will always play a very important role in your life. No offense, but we all can't live like RMS. I don't stand to judge his choices, but I will say that I will not choose the same path as he has. Every person has the right to choose how they wish to lead their lives, and I choose to participate in the money driven ecocomy in which I find myself.
GPL, in my opinion, strikes a carefull balance between the desires of a world with "Free" software, and the needs of a money driven society. It isn't perfect, but it is the best we have for now. As such, I think that business interest in Linux is a good thing. It helps to assure that there will always be talent furthering the cause, and improving the code. It brings recognition to the software, to the cause, and ultimately to the developers that make it happen. It would be in our best interest as a community to learn to manage the problems that business brings to Open Source Software, instead of running away from business, and fragmenting as a community. Bickering and fighting won't make the issue go away, it will only weaken us.
It continues to amaze me to see people bad mouth the work of the KDE group and the GNOME group. Both of these groups have worked very hard to give you something for FREE. These are quality "products". They may not be perfect, but they are advancing rapidly. If you disagree with the philosophy of one or the other, then don't use the one you don't like. Linux offers you the unique choice of interfaces. Find one you like and use it. Don't bother me about which one I need to use. Don't run around putting peoples hard work down. Voice your opinion through your choice, not your big mouth. Hey, by the way, don't forget Afterstep and Window Maker. Hell, there are probably 10 or 12 more. As for Red Hat supporting KDE, great. In my humble opinion, I believe that a distrobution maker should offer their customers the widest range of choices. It's good to see this happening.
-Master Switch (Linux, KDE, GNOME, Window Maker, AfterStep, and console user) Its ALL GOOD
Chances are that your tar and gunzip utilities are dynamicaly linked against the original glibc. What probably happened is that your gzip unziped your new glibc, then tar stomped on the old one, tar exited, then gzip tried to do the next file. However, the old glibc was gone, and you ended up with the linker calling the wrong glibc, and this glibc had different symbols. The moral of the story is that YOU SHOULD NOT ATTEMPT TO UPGRADE YOUR GLIBC without first KNOWING what you are doing. glibc is a critical piece of your linux distro. Think of glibc being second in importance to the kernel. However, You DO NOT UPGRADE glibc like you upgrade your kernel. It is much more involved and delicate than kernels are. I recommend that you wait until your favorite distro has it installed. There is a lot of recompiling that must be done when upgrading your glibc's. In theory, you should be able to have both glibc2.0, and glibc2.1 on the same system, but it requires a delicate approach to do this right. And if something goes wrong in the middle, your fscked. If you loose the original glibc, your dynamicaly linked executables won't start properly, if at all. The ones that are running should be fine, but once you re-boot, forget it. You should use statically linked tar and gunzip to handle the upgrade of libraries. during the change over, they wont get hammered, and all will be well(at least we hope). Good luck.
I am designing an emulator that emulates an emulator emulating the emulator that emulates the emulator emulating an emulated emulator, emulating EMACS, emulating VI, emulating ed, emulating a PIII running emulated MacOS, running emulated Windows 98 in emulated Win 3.1 mode, running emulated DOS, emulating a Commodore 64.
Slashdot Mirror
But any holes that arise will quickly be closed. I sincerely doubt that there will ever be the danger of viruses for Linux as there is for WinXX. Anyhow, Unix has been around for almost 30 years, and it has many users and developers, by your reasoning, there should already be a large proliferation of Viruses for Unix, and hence Linux. I don't see that, and I doubt I ever will
There are few, if any viruses that will affect unix. There is the occasional worm, but even those are few and far between. You might not be imune from spreading the virus, but it won't affect you. If you are really nuts about being immune, and protecting your data, Run VMS. The point is, Stop running crap os's and their crap apps, and you won't have to put up with the Crap. I run Linux 24-7-365, and it's on the net unsupervised all of the time. With a little reading, I have been able to secure it to a level where I am comfortable that it won't be hacked. It's been tried, but no one has been able to get in(You just have to love SSH). If you are going to drive on Public streets, learn to drive. If you are going to be on Public nets, learn to protect yourself. Don't expect the Govt to hold your hand, and don't expect your OS vendor to protect you. Your safety is your responsibility. As for the author of the Virus, I personally feel that 10-15 years is a bit heafty for a prank. Why put murderers away for only 5 to 7, and put a talented programmer away for 10-15. Something isn't right here. Anyway, that's my take on it
This April fools sh*t is getting out of hand. I had several friends of mine call last night to tell me about all of this cr*p. I had to slowly explain to them that it was April Fools day. I am getting sick of having to explain to the fools that it's just a joke. We should be careful here, some people just won't "get" it. Someone might actually fly off the "hook" on this stuff.
Doesn't mean they are not out to get you
The more the merrier. What I like about this distro is that it works to cement Linux on Apple. Very cool.
Assholes. I for one, am glad that ESR is staying on board. However I do have one suggestion. Just as you should not go around sniffing ....., you should in turn ignore most people's opinions. Most of what is posted on SlashDot, and related discussion groups is just trash, and not worth the stress it can cause you. Stay focused on your goals, ignore the ranting, and keep up the good work. The same goes to RMS, Linus, Alan, and the rest of the gang. Ignore the trash, there will always be more of it than should be. People love to complain, but rarely like to compliment. It is an odd habit of us Humans that we desire aproval, but tend to only dish out disapproval. Hmmm, well, anyway, know that your efforts are appreciated by the silent majority of us. Keep up the excellent work.
Either it should be GPL, BERKLEY, or keep it proprietary. Too many licenses will cause confusion, headache, and unecessary litigation. If you can't afford to release under one of the two above mentioned Licenses, then keep it to yourself. Anyhow, that's my 2cents worth.
Red Hat's unwavering support of the GPL, and their strict insistance on applying it to all that they do, leads me to believe that they are not, nor will they ever, try to take "ownership" of the Linux movement. Red Hat has done a fine job, and whether you like to admit it or not, if it wasn't for them, Linux awareness would be two or three years behind where it is today. Red Hat was one of the first vendors to support multiple platforms. They put up the money to help with GNOME, and now also KDE. They fund the development of graphics card drivers, and they are partially responsible for much of the recent Kernel development(Alan Cox). I don't see the other vendors stepping to the plate like this. Don't get me wrong, I like SuSE, SlackWare, Debian, etc... But I am somewhat dissapointed with other vendors willingness to give back to Linux.
Keep up the good work
Keep up the good work :)
Hmmm, I would have to agree with this article. To be a hacker, one should know Unix. We should remember that Unix is the grandfather of almost all modern OS's. How many operating systems have their bases in VMS, hmmmm, let's see, that would be Win NT. Well, we know how that is turning out. No offense to VMS, I actually like it quite a bit, but I cut my teeth on Unix, and have learned my trade from Unix. I also agree with the dedication part. Programming is not easy. It requires that you think about your world in a very unique way. I am a Mechanical Engineer by training(though I work as a C/C++ programmer), and I find that programming is much like Engineering. It requires that you look upon your surroundings with analytical eyes. As with engineering, you don't learn everything on your own. Instead, you draw upon the knowledge of your peers and seniors.
Coding is the engineering of the modern age. Just as many cultures revered fine engineering(the Romans and Greeks), so does ours revere coding. We coders may not yet have the status of famous Architects and Designers, but our time is comming. Programming is the tool that will solve tommorrows pressing questions. The human Genome project, Space flight, Tissue engineering and so on, all rely heavily on computers, and in particular, code. Our ability to model our world is directly tied to our ability to manipulate it. Computers are the tools to help model, and coders are the ones that make it possible(No offense to you EE's out there, we have love for you too). Anyhow, perhaps I digress from my original thought. To make a long story short, I thought the article was well written, and presents a true picture of what it means to be a hacker.
Master Switch out
Hmmm, Let's look at it this way. You could, if you wanted to, order a pizza in Chicago, even if you lived in Austin. However, what would be the point. If it were not a prank, then there would be no purpose. A pizza is a material object. You have to be there, or near by to get the pizza.
So, what does this have to do with IPP. Well, even if I could print in Chicago, even though I live in Austin TX, what would be the point. Why would I want to be able to print in Chicago. I can't feesably get the printout. If I wanted to send a document, I would e-mail a PDF, or text document, or whatever. Then the recieving party could choose to print it if they wanted to. There would be no need for me to be able to force their printer to print it. The only use for IPP in this sense, would be to cause trouble.
Now IPP might be usefull for Intranets. You could use IPP to print a document down the hall, and then get up and go get it. However, I can already do this with Post Script, and lpr. Almost all printers understand Post Script. I don't see the need to have IPP, if what I have already works well, and is cross platform capable. As it is, PS is available for all platforms.
Anyway, I have to go now, I am going to order a Pizza in Deleware. I wonder if they will guarantee 30 minute delivery?
Hmmm, this thing and the way it is marketed just lends itself to dirty jokes. Just be ware that too much "Twidling" has been reported to cause hairy palms. I have tested this theory for the past several years, but results are inconclusive. There is no excessive hair on my palms, but maybe that is because of all the "Twidling". Hmmm, I guess I will never know.
Don't forget MIPS and PPC in there. Note that Linux runs well on all of these architectures. Linux runs in 32 bit, 64 bit, and rumor has it, there is a 128bit version floating around, though I doubt it right now. NT runs on INTEL and ALPHA. Intel has little if any footing in the Server class arena, and NT Alpha is all but a forgotten cause. If NT claims to run on Server class hardware, then shouldn't it run on hardware other than X86 hardware? NT Alpha is tiny, over 80% of NT is on X86. I guess NT is really only a Desktop Operating system.
Hmmm,
This is a very interesting article, It is interesting to see how people from a different era viewed these issues. I waiver in my own opinion. On one hand, I can see the value of Open ideas with no copyright or protection, but on the other, I see these problems. First, if one could not patent a process, it would be impossible to compete. Let us say that you invented a better wheel. You are an everyday joe, not much money to your name. Now, GoodYear comes along, finds out about your wheel, and then starts producing it, at great profit for themselves. What recourse do you now have. If there is no IP law to protect you, you have no recourse. IP law was designed in part to protect those with few resources from the infringement of those with large amounts of resource. A lack of IP law would actually favor the large corporations, not the average joe. If you can't protect your invention, there is no incentive to invent.
On the flip side of that coin what if INTEL or DEC could not patent parts of their design, how could they ever recover the millions, if not billions that were spent to develope their chips. If they couldn't, chances are that we would still be running on vacuum tubes, if even that. It works both ways. IP law is designed to protect the single inventor as well as the Multi Billion dollar corporation. It is not perfect, but it is an attempt to protect the motivation to invent.
Now, where I would agree with the article is in the area of software. I believe that software is only copyrightable, and not patentable. No one should be able to patent an algorithm. Would it not be absured if Shakespear had a patent on tragedy. You could view tragedy as an artistice algorithm. Certaintly, he should be able to protect his original works, but not the general idea behind them. Same for software. Microsoft should be able to copyright the software that enables Cascading Style sheets, but they should not be able to patent Cascading Style sheets themselves Anyway, that's my 2cents worth
Master Switch out
Fear [F]
Uncertanty [U]
(and)
Doubt [D].
AKA FUD
I have used Red Hat, SuSE, and Debian. I see no real differences between any of the modern version s of these. Back when Red Hat switched to glibc, that is when everyone thought Red Hat was breaking compatability. In reality, it was a smart move, and everyone else soon followed. In general, the only real differences between systems is how the files are laid out. For the most part, they are all in the same place from distro to distro, with a few minor, but noticiable differences. Most of the necessary libraries are present, along with all of the necessary tools. The only reason SuSE RPM's and Red Hat RPM's are different is due to file layout, and some minor differences in XF86 setups between the distros. You can, and I have, install SuSE rpm's on Red Hat, and vice versa. It takes a bit more configuring, but it really isn't all that hard for most things. In general, I don't see Red Hat trying to bully the Linux market. They are the leaders because they have taken the time to develop(GNOME, RPM, Kernel Development through Alan Cox etc...) and market Linux. They have earned their position. If they should try to do anything stupid, SuSE would eat their lunch.
Hmmm, you are right to point out that *BSD was copied quite a bit, but as a pure system in itself, it never was very successfull. Linux, on the other hand, has become quite successfull on it's own. This, I think, is more important than having everyone copy your code, but not ever pay you for it. Berkley ,I am sure, got paid. But the actuall students that helped develop it were left floating in the breeze, so to speak.
I see business and OSS as a good pair. No offense, but one of the reasons that *BSD's never got very far is that they never attracted business. *BSD's have been around longer than Linux, and they are just as stable, but why have they always been religated to just being a passing hobby. The way they are licensed never attracted commercial attention, therefore they never got more than a very small foothold in the commercial sector. They remain primarily a college student's hobby.
On the other hand, the GPL was designed to explicitly give entry into the commercial sector. It allows, and even encourages commercial pursuit of the code which is licensed under it. In order to attract and keep active talent, you ultimately need to have a way to make money with the code. You can't realisticly expect programmers to continue to add to the code after college, if they can't make money. Once you start pursuing a career, and having children, your philosiphical outlook on "Free" software begins to take a second row seat to these more pressing needs. GPL'd software allows business to make money for their efforts, which means that developers get paid. Whether you like to admit it or not, $$$$ will always play a very important role in your life. No offense, but we all can't live like RMS. I don't stand to judge his choices, but I will say that I will not choose the same path as he has. Every person has the right to choose how they wish to lead their lives, and I choose to participate in the money driven ecocomy in which I find myself.
GPL, in my opinion, strikes a carefull balance between the desires of a world with "Free" software, and the needs of a money driven society. It isn't perfect, but it is the best we have for now. As such, I think that business interest in Linux is a good thing. It helps to assure that there will always be talent furthering the cause, and improving the code. It brings recognition to the software, to the cause, and ultimately to the developers that make it happen. It would be in our best interest as a community to learn to manage the problems that business brings to Open Source Software, instead of running away from business, and fragmenting as a community. Bickering and fighting won't make the issue go away, it will only weaken us.
-Master Switch out
It continues to amaze me to see people bad mouth the work of the KDE group and the GNOME group. Both of these groups have worked very hard to give you something for FREE. These are quality "products". They may not be perfect, but they are advancing rapidly. If you disagree with the philosophy of one or the other, then don't use the one you don't like. Linux offers you the unique choice of interfaces. Find one you like and use it. Don't bother me about which one I need to use. Don't run around putting peoples hard work down. Voice your opinion through your choice, not your big mouth. Hey, by the way, don't forget Afterstep and Window Maker. Hell, there are probably 10 or 12 more. As for Red Hat supporting KDE, great. In my humble opinion, I believe that a distrobution maker should offer their customers the widest range of choices. It's good to see this happening.
-Master Switch (Linux, KDE, GNOME, Window Maker, AfterStep, and console user) Its ALL GOOD
Cool
Mite I sug jest that al uf ur books be ritten in foniks. it maeks for faster reeding.
Keep'm
Chances are that your tar and gunzip utilities are dynamicaly linked against the original glibc. What probably happened is that your gzip unziped your new glibc, then tar stomped on the old one, tar exited, then gzip tried to do the next file. However, the old glibc was gone, and you ended up with the linker calling the wrong glibc, and this glibc had different symbols. The moral of the story is that YOU SHOULD NOT ATTEMPT TO UPGRADE YOUR GLIBC without first KNOWING what you are doing. glibc is a critical piece of your linux distro. Think of glibc being second in importance to the kernel. However, You DO NOT UPGRADE glibc like you upgrade your kernel. It is much more involved and delicate than kernels are. I recommend that you wait until your favorite distro has it installed. There is a lot of recompiling that must be done when upgrading your glibc's. In theory, you should be able to have both glibc2.0, and glibc2.1 on the same system, but it requires a delicate approach to do this right. And if something goes wrong in the middle, your fscked. If you loose the original glibc, your dynamicaly linked executables won't start properly, if at all. The ones that are running should be fine, but once you re-boot, forget it. You should use statically linked tar and gunzip to handle the upgrade of libraries. during the change over, they wont get hammered, and all will be well(at least we hope). Good luck.
I am designing an emulator that emulates an emulator emulating the emulator that emulates the emulator emulating an emulated emulator, emulating EMACS, emulating VI, emulating ed, emulating a PIII running emulated MacOS, running emulated Windows 98 in emulated Win 3.1 mode, running emulated DOS, emulating a Commodore 64.