On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 2:37 PM, Phillip Moore <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Nov 23, 2012 at 2:07 PM, Steven Jenkins > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Why is RHEL 6 handled natively? Note that I'm working on RHEL 6 >> (rhel/gcc/4.4.6) and have run into a few problems, but I'm using an >> ancient version of efsdeploy, so I expect some of these problems are >> essentially self-inflicted. > > Why not? I would always prefer to have native builds whenever > possible, and only use the backwards compatibility links as a > migration tool.
I see. I had misunderstood 'native' to mean 'not in EFS', but you mean 'native' as in 'not using backwards compatibility with RHEL 5'. Using native RHEL 6 builds makes perfect sense. > > My current bootstrap/rebuild has been done natively for both RHEL5 and > RHEL6, and I'm building the rhel/gcc compilers for both platforms as > well. > My current build with the legacy has built natively for both RHEL 5 & 6 as well, and has successfully rebuilt a number of pieces of software. I'm switching now to the EFS 3 infra and will be working on that in parallel. > efsdeploy has evolved pretty rapidly, and all the latest stuff isn't > going to work with the old version, I'm sure. > > The only thing I can possibly support is the latest version. I understand you can't support the old stuff. I'm just letting you (and anyone reading) know that I'm using a different version, so we might see some different results from time to time because of that. Thanks, Steven _______________________________________________ EFS-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mailman.openefs.org/mailman/listinfo/efs-dev
