[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Default ISA/tuning flags for GCC, --enable-kernel= level for glibc

On Mon, 2009-01-26 at 09:39 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
> On Mon, 26 Jan 2009, Ulrich Drepper wrote:
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > Jakub Jelinek wrote:
> > >> The koji build boxes all run RHEL 5.  Getting them upgraded to a not-yet-
> > >> released kernel seems unlikely.
> > >
> > > I know it is a pain, on the other hand it would really improve Fedora 11.
> >
> > Not only that.  It is the only way to actually test what we are shipping.
> >
> > At least from glibc's POV (but indirectly from a much wider range) we
> > have to compile everything on the kernel we are shipping for the
> > release.  Period.  I know that the current build infrastructure doesn't
> > do this but this only means it has to change.  We have virtualization
> > available, there is no excuse.
> >
> Ehh, I assure you if we don't change it... Fedora 11 will still ship so it
> doesn't "have to change".  So someone needs to articulate, very precisely,
> what benefit investing time into our buildsystem, testing, release
> upgrading (Fedora is more expensive then RHEL), etc is going to have.
> Keep in mind we still can't even build epel on our normal buildsystem yet
> because of $PEOPLE_TIME
> What benefit will it have to our users?
> What benefit will it have to our developers?

Mike, some features in our packages are determined at build time
depending on what kernel you build them on.
So if the kernel is old enough, you might miss functionality in the
resulting packages, even more so if that package happens to be glibc I


Simo Sorce * Red Hat, Inc * New York

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]