Hi, Alan DuBoff pÃÅ¡e v pá 23. 03. 2007 v 12:12 -0700: > On Friday 23 March 2007 01:00 am, Eric Enright wrote: > > Indeed. > > > > Several months ago a friend of mine running Debian did an `apt-get > > dist-upgrade'. Among other things, it upgraded apache2 and squid to > > newer versions, which took advantage of epoll(). > > > > epoll() is only available in Linux 2.6. These packages were built on > > 2.6, which made use of this newly available syscall. These packages > > were then deployed to systems running 2.4 kernels (also packaged by > > the same organization, and not obsoleted.) The resulting crashes were > > really quite spectacular. > > A friend of mine runs Debian also, and recentely had a different problem > where > only a 32-bit version was available for a package after he did a > dist-upgrade, and that caused him to have to revert back to 32-bit and/or > possibly UMP to get his system running. > > The binary compatibility in Solaris/OpenSolaris is something that doesn't get > the respect it deserves in these cases. >
OK, boys, could you stop with this thread, please? I has been using Debian (and am still on some places) for aprox. 10 years. I met several problems, but: a) Eric case - wasn't it Debian testing (Etch), where Linux 2.4 is not officially supported? In the other case it was significant bug in buildd. b) Alan case - x86/amd64 platform or some other? Because amd64 is not supported officially in Debian stable (Sarge). So, please, if you are using testing version, please, expect that it is not stable release. The same if you are using backports. If you are upgrading your release, read release notes. Linux has +&-, Debian has +&-, OSOL has +&- And, again, please, stop with this ..., it is not good for OSOL, community, world, peace etc. ;-) Have a nice weekend Milan _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
