Ken Moffat wrote:
> If we pick a variant of the "oldest practical" kernel, why do we
> bother to upgrade glibc (other than to get timezone changes and bug
> fixes) ? In my experience, LFS has always tried to use recent
> versions of software, and it now looks as if building for recent
> versions of the kernel is a prerequisite to making the most of
> glibc (indeed, has been preferred for a long time, it's just that we
> didn't realise).
Maybe I don't understand the --enable-kernel option well enough, but I
thought that it meant that it compiled compatibility with kernel x.y.z
and later. That doesn't mean that newer kernels can't take advantage of
the newer functionality, does it?
>From the INSTALL:
`--enable-kernel=VERSION'
This option is currently only useful on GNU/Linux systems. The
VERSION parameter should have the form X.Y.Z and describes the
smallest version of the Linux kernel the generated library is
expected to support. The higher the VERSION number is, the less
compatibility code is added, and the faster the code gets.
So I still think that this is just an optimization.
-- Bruce
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
