Historical accident. It should be based on the GLIBC version, but it's not.

On Jan 2, 2008 5:14 PM, Avinesh Kumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I want to know why the sysnames for Linux platform are named diffrently
> than it is done for other platforms. On Linux we have sysnames,
> i386_linux24,
> i386_linux26 etc which is named after kernel version whereas the same is
> done after OS version like rs_aix52, rs_aix53, sun4x_59, sun4x_510 etc for
> other platforms.
>
> According to the AFS semantics, the binaries under a sysname should be
> able to run on all systems with the same sysname, if I am right.
>
> However, considering Linux here, OS versions can get significant changes
> over time and we may not be advanced to 2.8.x kernel. So in this case,
> sysname would still be same 'i386_linux26' but the binaries may not run
> across.
>
> Considering the changes done in ELF format replacing SHT_HASH section
> by SHT_GNU_HASH, the binaries built (with default options) on RHEL-5 would
> not
> work on RHEL-4, both happen to have 2.6.x kernel.
>
>
> So If a user builds his program "bigtest" on RHEL5 and puts it under @sys
> area
> and tries to run the same from RHEL4, which would point to the same
> binary, and
> this would not work.
>
> As of now, the RHEL-5 user should make use of linker option
> "-Wl,--hash-style=sysv"
> if he plans to put under @sys directory.
>
> Please correct me if I am wrong.
>
> Thanks.
>
>
>    ~avinesh
>

Reply via email to