[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Update: redhat/base
- To: ports_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
- Subject: Re: Update: redhat/base
- From: Zvezdan Petkovic <zvezdan_(_at_)_CS_(_dot_)_WM_(_dot_)_EDU>
- Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 08:48:14 -0400
- Mail-followup-to: ports_(_at_)_openbsd_(_dot_)_org
On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 12:30:08PM +0000, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> begin electrogrammati illius Zvezdan Petkovic
> >Why didn't we go with RH9 instead? If the update is being done, why not
> >the latest, with the most recent kernel/libs?
> Because the Linuxulation in the OpenBSD kernel is only akin to Linux kernel
> version 2.2.x with a small number of x, plus a _few_ of the additions that
> kernel 2.3.x and 2.4.x give.
> So probably the libs from a kernel 2.2.10 GNU/Linux system would work best.
This doesn't make too much sense to me. If the system calls that
emulate Linux kernel support RH8.0 they should support RH9. RH8.0 uses
the Linux kernel series 2.4.18, RH9 uses 2.4.19. The difference in libc
and whatever else is used in the port shouldn't be that big.
Although I admit that one unsupported system call would make a good
enough reason. :-)
Zvezdan Petkovic <zvezdan_(_at_)_cs_(_dot_)_wm_(_dot_)_edu>