RHL9 glibc update OK with vanilla kernel?

[James Kosin]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: RIPEMD160
 
Steve Snyder wrote:

>On Monday 14 November 2005 16:26, James Kosin wrote:
>
>>Steve Snyder wrote:
>>
>>>On Monday 14 November 2005 16:00, Jesse Keating wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon, 2005-11-14 at 15:53 -0500, Steve Snyder wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Are there any known compatibility problems with the current i686 glibc
>>>>>packages (released yesterday) and a plain-vanilla 2.4.3x kernel? Any
>>>>>loss of functionality or other Bad Stuff(tm)?
>>>>>
>>>>Unfortunately this isn't really part of our QA tests, so I don't think
>>>>there is a yes or a no that could come from the Legacy Project itself.
>>>>However a user may have already tried it...
>>>
>>>
>>>Yeah, I figured the testing was done in a purely RedHat/Legacy
>>>environment. I'm hoping another subscriber to the list is in a position
>>>similar to mine.
>>
>>I'd like to know why you think the kernel relies on the glibc version?
>>What is it that has changed that effects the kernel.
>>
>>James Kosin
>>(Running FC1 with generic 2.4.32 kernel)
>
>
>My thinking is the other way around. Not that glibc affects the kernel,
>but that RedHat-vintage glibc expects services/functionality provided
>by RedHat's patches to the 2.4.20 kernel.
>
>I'd be even more concerned if running FC1, given RH's NPTL patches.
>>From the above note, though, that seems not to be an issue.
>
>Thanks for the response.
>
>--
>fedora-legacy-list mailing list
>fedora-legacy-list at redhat.com
>https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-legacy-list

I think if it is not supported in the kernel (no matter which) that it
shouldn't break glibc or the other way around.  But, I'm not sure how
heavily the glibc package relies on the RedHat / Fedora kernel.

I guess, if it does effect things negatively, I'd like to know sooner
myself; so I can work toward re-applying the patches to my 2.4.32
kernel which is not stock...  due to the complexities and time needed
to rework the large number of patches.

Thanks,
James
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
 
iD8DBQFDeRJgkNLDmnu1kSkRA/PKAJ9kpSDKXVZDvmghg01cKPEE2TBVOgCbBLhu
TCsEBaNbnnxfi1du1tokxpw=
=iMNG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-- 
Scanned by ClamAV - http://www.clamav.net