On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 15:34 +0100, Paul Eggleton wrote: > On Thursday 07 July 2011 15:24:46 Koen Kooi wrote: > > angstrom has been setting it to 2.6.16 for some years now, I forget which > > bug that fixed over 2.6.0 > > Personally I don't know enough about which crusty old 2.6 kernels people are > still using out there, so I figured 2.6.0 was the safest bet. > > A trawl of the OE history turns up these two: > > ----------------------------------- > commit 8b0202e6e3f90a772df301e8522f9deb03e50132 > Author: Tom Rini <[email protected]> > Date: Wed Mar 3 12:17:38 2010 -0700 > > glibc*.inc: Bump OLDEST_KERNEL to 2.6.16 > > Per glibc's ChangeLog, 2.6.16 is the minimum required by at least glibc > 2.9 > Prior to this, it was a murky 2.6.14 + patches to 2.6.16 (when it was all > upstream). > ----------------------------------- > commit 794e8652f5c4fef71a8b9ab834b39f75b99f9420 > Author: Koen Kooi <[email protected]> > Date: Thu May 21 20:30:37 2009 +0200 > > Angstrom 2009.X: set OLDEST_KERNEL to 2.6.16 to avoid problems with > ppoll() > ----------------------------------- > > Any further comments/info? Should we be using 2.6.16 in oe-core as well?
I'd suggest yes... Cheers, Richard _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
