Re: Requiring Linux 3.2 for glibc 2.24

[Mike Frysinger <vapier at gentoo dot org>]

On 11 Feb 2016 08:54, Dmitry Mishin wrote:
> > On 02/09/2016 03:54 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
> >> On 02/09/2016 03:36 PM, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> >> 
> >>> I am in favor of that. That said when have we tried to do so in Debian
> >>> stretch/sid (which will be released in 2017), people started to
> >>>complain
> >>> loudly that it breaks openvz. We had to revert the change given a lot
> >>>of
> >>> VPS providers are using openvz.
> >>>
> >>> It seems that openvz is currently not ported on more recent kernels
> >>>than
> >>> 2.6.32 and that it will be supported until 2019 for SLES11 and 2020 for
> >>> RHEL7. This unfortunately doesn't encourage openvz to move to newer
> >>> kernels.
> >> 
> >> I've got access to a Virtuozzo container which runs on a commercially
> >> supported (?) 3.10 kernel variant.
> > 
> > It turns out it's lying about the kernel version:
> > 
> > <https://bugs.openvz.org/browse/OVZ-5843>
> >  
> > Oh dear.
> 
> Yep, we have to do this in order still allow OpenVZ users to run desired
> software
> inside Containers. Unfortunately, they will to run brand new Linux
> distributions
> every time they appear. :)
> 
> Seriously, we wouldn't do these hacks if glibc preserve compatibility with
> old Kernels.

that makes no sense.  glibc already supports 2.6.32 today.  maybe you're
misattributing the problem to distros or other packages ?  off the top of
my head, i know udev is pretty aggressive at dropping support for older
versions of linux.  however, simply lying via uname doesn't actually make
the code work -- they're requiring newer versions because they expect the
functionality that's supposed to be in newer versions.  so unless you're
actually backporting features too (ugh), then your system is broken.
-mike

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature