On 04/03/2013 11:12 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
>> We already reject compilation of LXC on RHEL 5 due to other
>> configure-time checks; is this something worth turning into an
>> additional configure test of whether a kernel is new enough, or are we
>> okay with just leaving it as a runtime test
On 04/03/2013 10:02 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> From: "Daniel P. Berrange"
>
> Early on kernel support for private devpts was not widespread,
> so we had compatibiltiy codepaths. Such old kernels are not
> seriously used for LXC these days, so the compat code can go
> away
>
> Signed-off-by:
On Wed, Apr 03, 2013 at 10:59:04AM -0600, Eric Blake wrote:
> On 04/03/2013 10:02 AM, Daniel P. Berrange wrote:
> > From: "Daniel P. Berrange"
> >
> > Early on kernel support for private devpts was not widespread,
> > so we had compatibiltiy codepaths. Such old kernels are not
> > seriously used
From: "Daniel P. Berrange"
Early on kernel support for private devpts was not widespread,
so we had compatibiltiy codepaths. Such old kernels are not
seriously used for LXC these days, so the compat code can go
away
Signed-off-by: Daniel P. Berrange
---
src/lxc/lxc_controller.c | 28 +-
