This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Synch with 2.4.4
- To: aj at suse dot de
- Subject: Re: Synch with 2.4.4
- From: Hans-Peter Nilsson <hans-peter dot nilsson at axis dot com>
- Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 15:06:21 +0200
- CC: hans-peter dot nilsson at axis dot com, libc-alpha at sourceware dot cygnus dot com
(CC changed to libc-alpha, as I'm not on the libc-hacker list
and mail therefore bounces.)
> Hans-Peter Nilsson <hans-peter.nilsson@axis.com> writes:
>
> > > From: Andreas Jaeger <aj@suse.de>
> > > Date: 29 Apr 2001 14:31:08 +0200
> > > Hans-Peter, kernel-features doesn't contain any information about
> > > cris. Can you look into this, please?
> >
> > I was under the delusion that the generic checking in
> > kernel-features.h was enough. While looking at the official
> > 2.4.3 and 2.4.4 I see that there's actually no usable official
> > kernel release that supports the CRIS glibc port. :-(
>
> We do some checking for special architectures for some constructs but
> not for all. So, please double check.
I did, and came to the conclusion to leave kernel-features.h as
is, as any modification would only be a partial solution:
> > Since IIUC glibc can't require 2.4.5 until it's released, and
> > for maintenance reasons should not have the kernel-version-
> > machinery target a specfic patch set, I think it's best to leave
> > kernel-features.h as is, until there's a suitable official
> > kernel release.
But if I understand you correctly, a partial solution is
preferred to nothing by libc maintainers. Perhaps it's ok to
assume a patched 2.4.3 as a minimum, until a 2.4.5 (with full
CRIS corrections) is released? I see that for example
ftruncate64 is mis-assumed to not be present.
> In the meantime perhaps a note be added that
> > the CRIS port needs kernel patches to work.
>
> Feel free to send a patch to the FAQ document.
Will do.
brgds, H-P