Bryan Kadzban wrote: > Matthew Burgess wrote: >> On Fri, 21 Jan 2011 15:48:09 -0600, Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >>> OK, so do we use 2.6.30.2 (LFS-6.5)? Do we need to update any other >>> packages in the requirements or make everything from LFS-6.5 (Aug 2009)? >>> Right now, the minimum requirements are from LFS-6.3 (Aug 2007). >> If we set it to 2.6.30 (there's no point in adding the stable version as >> Glibc only checks the major.minor.patch level), we'll miss out on >> F_GETOWN_EX (new in 2.6.32 - see http://lwn.net/Articles/354842/) and >> recvmmsg (new in 2.6.33 - see http://lwn.net/Articles/334854/) support. > > We won't actually miss out on either of those, because that's not what > --enable-kernel= changes. It only removes compatibility code for older > kernels; it does *not* cause glibc to omit support for newer syscalls or > newer flags (assuming they're in the headers it was built against, and > assuming it knows about them at all). If a program is running against > such a glibc on a too-old kernel (that doesn't support those syscalls or > flags), it will generally get ENOSYS or EINVAL errors. > > So I don't see a need, feature-wise, to raise the minimum kernel version > at all. :-) > > Except for the glibc failures -- but it seems to me that these are > likely due to a bug in glibc. When the two __ASSUME_BLAHBLAH symbols > are defined to different values, I think it's generating incorrect code. > But I haven't been able to reproduce it, or strace the test file, or > gdb the test file, so I can't tell what the bug is yet. :-(
I don't think I agree. If setting the --enable-kernel= option allows the tests to pass with the __ASSUME_ symbol__ASSUME_s set at their default, then there is something going on to change the behavior. On a slightly OT note, I still get a failure on tst-cpuclock2 when building via jhalfs, but not when building manually. I guess I need to modify the jhalfs scripts to output the results before removing the glibc-build directory. We do note that tst-cpuclock2 is a problem test in the book. My latest test used --enable-kernel=2.6.33 and a 2.6.35.2 kernel. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
