Dan Nicholson wrote: > On Tue, May 26, 2009 at 9:32 AM, Bruce Dubbs <bruce.du...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Dan Nicholson wrote:
>> The reason I saw was so code didn't have to check for certain features at run >> time. The would be to make things easier for the programmers. 2.6.18 >> corresponds to RHEL 5 and is a compromise for backward compatibility and >> convenience. 2.6.18 was September 2006. > > This doesn't correspond to runtime checks that programmers do. It > refers to runtime checks done in glibc to enable compat paths when > necessary. By saying what your minimum kernel is x.y.z, then the > compat paths for kernel versions earlier than that will not be > compiled into libc. Glibc provides the same interfaces to programmers > regardless. > > If a programmer is trying to use a specific kernel feature (like > inotify), then they have to handle that in their code. Glibc's > --enable-kernel setting has no bearing on that. Thanks for the clarification. >> Using 2.6.18 appears to potentially affect binaries built against kernels >> older >> than that and run on a LFS-6.5 or later system. I don't see where that would >> be >> an issue. > > I don't think it affects binaries. It only affects what kernel you're > running. You can have an ancient binary, and so long as the binary > format and interfaces are still supported on the system you're > running, it should be fine. It sounds like you are agreeing with me. An ancient binary will not run if the support is not built into glibc. -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
