On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 2:02 PM, Jeff Blaine <[email protected]> wrote: .... > Due to drastic differences in OS libraries present, those (like us), > who use @sys in PATH, get bitten. That is, our build of AppX for > 'amd64_linux26' that was built on RHEL 5 will not work on RHEL 6, > and we need to support both.
In the case of "system" libraries (vs what you might install locally), RedHat typically provides one version compatibility. If it was built on RHEL5, it should run on RHEL6, although you may have to install various "compatibility" libraries. If it does not, you should open a ticket with RedHat. But the general problem remains, especially in the Linux world where libraries/interface backwards compatibility has not been a historically agreed upon requirement. (AIX, *BSD, Solaris generally support even older interfaces; I think we were running an old SunOS binary through many versions of Solaris). Iff you have a standard (and supported) distro, using that as a high level distinguisher as part of your syslist may make sense. I know that at $dayjob$ there was a very long debate regarding the syslist sequence, and trying to deal with both the known examples, and some obvious edge cases, and the end result made no one entirely happy. I think that is likely the end state for all such taxonomy attempts. "Get used to disappointment". The best one can do is pick something that makes a little bit of sense, and try to consider building in the flexibility to change it (because you likely will). Gary _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-info mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-info
