On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 07:24:50PM +0200, Gilles Espinasse wrote: > Selon Ken Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > ... > > LFS dev has on glibc --enable-kernel=2.6.0 > FC9 has set --enable-kernel=2.6.9 > Debian lenny has set --enable-kernel=2.6.18 > Greg has the same 2.6.18 setting on glibc chroot compilation (but nothing on > first compilation). > > It does not look clear to me if the reason for debian to set 2.6.18 are valid > "...Currently, MIN_KERNEL_SUPPORTED is set to 2.6.9 and (as you know) > leaves out some newer features. > ..." > > My understanding was that more compatibility workaround were enabled with a > lower --enable-kernel, not that it disable some new features. I may have been > partially wrong, reading glibc manual: > "The higher the version number is, the less compatibility code is added, and > the > faster the code gets." > > On IPCop, we had choosen --enable-kernel=2.6.5 because of a reference I can no > more found explaining using 2.6.0 may trigger some bugs. > > Should you not consider to increase --enable-kernel, at least to 2.6.9? > > Gilles > Thanks for the reminder. The last time this came up (Alexander reported artsd spamming the log), there was no consensus and it was clear that I didn't really understand it (and I also didn't see the messages in my own log). I was hoping to take a look at it in detail, but that didn't happen.
To me, 2.6.9 is ancient history! (4 years old). I think something like 2.6.16 (purely because it is still getting long-term support updates) is a better minimum, but also I think we should encourage people to build a new kernel first (if they aren't using a Live CD) so that they can be sure it works with their .config, and then they can use --enable-kernel=current. Certainly, my own builds now use --enable-kernel=current (i.e. running kernel and the headers I build are the same). My impression is that setting it later than the running kernel will worst-case cause the build to fail when the glibc in chroot tries to use an interface that isn't available. But, I don't encourage people to build new systems while running an old kernel! To save people googling for the original thread, the new things are listed in sysdeps/unix/sysv/linux/kernel-features.h. That 'MIN_KERNEL_SUPPORTED' seems to be a debian thing ? All the references on google except for one are to debian lists and bugs. The other was for glibc-2.2.4 and the symbol was in debian/sysdeps/linux.mk. I can't find it in (clfs's) glibc-2.8. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
