[oe] [oe-commits] Roman I Khimov : (e) glibc-package: fix kernel version passed to qemu

[Roman I Khimov]

On Monday 18 May 2009 23:37:09 Phil Blundell wrote:
> On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 19:54 +0100, Phil Blundell wrote:
> > On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 22:42 +0400, Roman I Khimov wrote:
> > > Now, I think that this should be fixed on target level. OLDEST_KERNEL
> > > should be something sane. Global 2.4.0 from bitbake.conf is good enough
> > > for most targets, but if we know that none of ARM EABI works with
> > > kernel versions prior to 2.6.14, we should set OLDEST_KERNEL to 2.6.14
> > > for that targets. Or higher, of course, if target needs/wants that. If
> > > that's OK with all, I'm doing a patch.
> >
> > I'm still not convinced this is either practical or desirable.  The
> > kernel versions you mentioned are the minimum required for the
> > particular version of glibc you were looking at, but different libcs or
> > different versions of the same libc will have different minimum kernel
> > requirements even for the same target.  (As an obvious example, the m68k
> > port has been supported in glibc since its inception and clearly didn't
> > require a 2.6.18 kernel to start with.)
>
> The other thing to say about OLDEST_KERNEL is that it was intended to be
> controlled by the DISTRO, not by the MACHINE.  In other words, it's a
> policy control ("kernel x.xx is the earliest one we care about; it's
> okay to omit the compatibility bits for older ones") and not a target
> attribute ("kernel x.xx is the minimum required for correct
> functionality").  We don't currently have a variable with the latter
> semantics and nor am I very convinced that it would be a good idea to
> introduce one.

We can add soft 'sane' assignments to machines and then distros can override 
that to whatever they want if they want to, or not?