On Wed, 26 Sep 2012 11:38:31 -0500 Troy Benjegerdes <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2) RHEL defines which kabi functions are 'stable' I'm not sure if you understand what Ken is talking about. As far as I can tell, Red Hat's intent is that this is supposed to still work even for things that do not stick to any "stable" whitelist of functions (for RHEL6 and beyond). So if something not "stable" changes, the kernel will recognize that the relevant kernel module is not compatible, and you need to recompile the thing. So we're not supposed to need to stick to a stable ABI. But as the thread that Ken linked shows, it doesn't seem to work. We're not sure why it doesn't work for that particular case, and Red Hat's new kernel patching policies make it difficult to figure out. I think it's hard to say how often that will reoccur without knowing what actually broke. It's of course safer to just recompile for any version change, but if that were acceptable to everyone I expect this kabi stuff wouldn't exist in the first place. I personally don't find it "worth it" to try and figure this out at the moment, but I've treated Linux's lack of interface stability/design as something to just 'live with' for awhile, so it doesn't bother me so much. -- Andrew Deason [email protected] _______________________________________________ OpenAFS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.openafs.org/mailman/listinfo/openafs-devel
