This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Linux kernel version support policy
- From: Allan McRae <allan at archlinux dot org>
- To: Rich Felker <dalias at aerifal dot cx>, Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>
- Cc: David Miller <davem at davemloft dot net>, libc-alpha at sourceware dot org, joseph at codesourcery dot com, aurel32 at debian dot org
- Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2014 15:08:05 +1000
- Subject: Re: Linux kernel version support policy
- Authentication-results: sourceware.org; auth=none
- References: <Pine dot LNX dot 4 dot 64 dot 1401272237400 dot 14736 at digraph dot polyomino dot org dot uk> <3591302 dot 5mrdmfoV2Y at vapier> <20140127 dot 161754 dot 1207156302138039240 dot davem at davemloft dot net> <3104304 dot iNEJkBTBu7 at vapier> <20140129021016 dot GN24286 at brightrain dot aerifal dot cx>
On 29/01/14 12:10, Rich Felker wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 27, 2014 at 07:47:13PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
>> On Monday, January 27, 2014 16:17:54 David Miller wrote:
>>> From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org>
>>>> i still see people running 2.6.18 kernels today. usually in server
>>>> environments like old RHEL 5 or OpenVZ or Xen instances.
>>>
>>> Are they upgrading to current versions of glibc?
>>
>> yes. they control the userland, not the kernel.
>
> While I'd like to bump the requirement, I see this as the best
> argument for NOT doing so. There are a lot of environments, especially
> cheap OpenVZ-based hosting, where the userland is provided completely
> by the customer/user who WANTS to be up-to-date, but who's stuck with
> a backwards kernel from their hosting provider.
>
This is an issue I had when I set the minimum kernel version to 2.6.32
in the Arch Linux glibc build. A lot of OpenVZ users were unhappy and I
believe an unofficial repository was set up to maintain a parallel glibc
package with 2.6.18 support.
Anyway, lets look at what various Linux distributions do with
--enable-kernel:
Arch Linux: 2.6.32
Debian: 2.6.32
Fedora: 2.6.32
Gentoo: not sure - seems to be user configurable?
openSUSE: 2.6.32 for x86_64, 2.6.16 otherwise
Ubuntu: 2.6.32 or 2.6.24 depending on architecture
So... 2.6.32 probably is not too controversial.
Allan