On Thu, Aug 28, 2003 at 03:29:01PM -0400, Jeff Johnson wrote: > > > > In fact I am already building with 4.2 for all RH platforms, is there > > > > anything to fear? > > > > Would 4.2.1 be a better candidate for consolidating rpm versions? > > Your choice is not as simple as choosing a version of rpm, you need to > worry about what kernel and glibc are on the target systems. > > This is NPTL/TLS/futex/O_DIRECT prolly more in action. Well, O_DIRECT is being ripped out by force in the specfiles (BTW when you decided to rip it out, you forgot to change the release tag, so there are some versions of rpm-4.2-1 floating around with enabled O_DIRECT support). BTW2 there is some discussion on the xfs lists on the background of db4/O_DIRECT/sparse files bug. If you like I can add you to the discussion. > If not NPTL, you want rpm version compiled w/o --enable-posixmutexes, > that means prefer rpm-4.1.1 over rpm-4.2 on non-NPTL. Why not use the same code base (be it 4.2 or 4.2.1) with --disable-posixmutexes? > And I suspect you can use rpm-4.2 to build for all platforms, that > is certainly my intent, but look before you leap, please. It already seems to work well for me. I just wanted to be sure. -- Axel.Thimm@physik.fu-berlin.de
Attachment:
pgp00017.pgp
Description: PGP signature