This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Requiring Linux 3.2 for glibc 2.24
- From: Adhemerval Zanella <adhemerval dot zanella at linaro dot org>
- To: Florian Weimer <fweimer at redhat dot com>
- Cc: Joseph Myers <joseph at codesourcery dot com>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Sun, 31 Jan 2016 16:30:15 -0200
- Subject: Re: Requiring Linux 3.2 for glibc 2.24
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <alpine dot DEB dot 2 dot 10 dot 1601311614080 dot 31071 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <56AE4D5F dot 9080105 at redhat dot com>
> Em 31 de jan de 2016, Ãs 16:07, Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> escreveu:
>
>> On 01/31/2016 05:22 PM, Joseph Myers wrote:
>> As Linux 2.6.32 has been announced to reach end-of-line next month
>> <https://lkml.org/lkml/2016/1/29/647>, I propose that for glibc 2.24 we
>> require Linux 3.2 as the minimum kernel version when glibc is used on
>> systems with the Linux kernel and there isn't already a more recent
>> architecture-specific minimum. This would continue to be the minimum
>> until 3.2 reaches EOL (currently listed as May 2018 at
>> <https://www.kernel.org/category/releases.html>). 3.2 would thus also be
>> the minimum headers version as well as the minimum version at runtime.
>
> Can we switch to 2.6.33 first, and then see how many more
> simplifications we get out of 3.2?
>
> 2.6.33 is an important step forward because it was when Alpha reached
> system call parity with other architectures; before that version, some
> old system calls such as pipe2 were not wired up properly.
>
> Florian
I see no compelling reason to switch to a non-supported version. Also I would have prefer GLIBC to keep supporting the minimum LTS kernel version instead of a specific version.