Skip to contentSkip to conversation

Bug in large files ext2 in 2.4.0-test11 ?

DISCUSSION Petr Vandrovec 5 participants 6 messages Nov 20, 2000 – Nov 21, 2000

lore
Share & tools
lore
#0 lore raw
Quoted 2 lines · Ben Collins

Does kernel 2.4.x compile and run well for all of our supported archs?

AFAIK yes. At least on all Debian archs.

Quoted 2 lines

Do programs compiled against a glibc with LFS (2.4.x kernel) support, and using that LFS support, work on kernel 2.2.x machines?

Yes. Even glibc (2.2) compiled against kernel without LFS support has LFS interface. Of course limited to 2GB files only.

Quoted 7 lines

Secondly, anyone who thinks they know what they are doing, can simply download the Debian glibc sources files, and build against kernel-2.4.0 headers with this simple command:

LINUX_SOURCE=/usr/src/linux-2.4.0-test11 apt-get -b source glibc

Simple, eh? :)

But time consuming... If you already invested CPU power to compile that large beast...
Best regards,
Petr Vandrovec [email protected]

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

#1 lore raw
Quoted 5 lines · Petr Vandrovec
Quoted 2 lines · Ben Collins

Does kernel 2.4.x compile and run well for all of our supported archs?

AFAIK yes. At least on all Debian archs.

So, sparc, ultrasparc, i386 (with pcmcia support), alpha, arm, m68k, powerpc? I know that mips, s390 and hppa almost require a 2.4.0 kernel, even if they aren't stable yet. But the other ports are more important, because we released them already, so we have a certain status quo to keep them working well.

Anyway, this isn't a major point.

Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Do programs compiled against a glibc with LFS (2.4.x kernel) support, and using that LFS support, work on kernel 2.2.x machines?

Yes. Even glibc (2.2) compiled against kernel without LFS support has LFS interface. Of course limited to 2GB files only.

On some platforms...

E.g. I can already access > 2gig files on my ultrasparc :)

Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 7 lines

Secondly, anyone who thinks they know what they are doing, can simply download the Debian glibc sources files, and build against kernel-2.4.0 headers with this simple command:

LINUX_SOURCE=/usr/src/linux-2.4.0-test11 apt-get -b source glibc

Simple, eh? :)

But time consuming... If you already invested CPU power to compile that large beast...

Well, patience is a virtue. Right now we don't have it in Debian for some very good reasons. We just transitioned to a new glibc (2.2 is there, and it works almost flawlessly, thanks to the glibc folks). Next step is gcc3 and kernel 2.4. Both of those combined promise to introduce some new and exciting bugs and conflicts. We can't just "dump them in there". We'de rather make a sane migration, test upgrades from previous versions, and work in our transition mechanisms. IOW, we don't have to just worry about 1 architecture and 1 distribution, we have to make sure upgrades work, make sure things don't break, and ensure backward compatibility is retained for 5 architectures that have released already (new archs don't need a transisition obviously).

That's a large undertaking, but the good thing is, in the end, the wait will be worth it to our users. People wont be stuck with Debian 2.2, simply because they can't do a decent upgrade to 2.3, when that releases.

The issue is already known, and yes it will get done in time. Getting all strung out about a kernel that isn't even released stable yet, is not going to help :)

Ben

Signature · 8 lines
 -----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/  Ben Collins  --  ...on that fantastic voyage...  --  Debian GNU/Linux   \
`  [email protected]  --  [email protected]  --  [email protected]  '
 `---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
#2 lore raw
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line

Does kernel 2.4.x compile and run well for all of our supported archs?

AFAIK yes. At least on all Debian archs.

BC> So, sparc, ultrasparc, i386 (with pcmcia support), alpha, arm, m68k, BC> powerpc? I know that mips, s390 and hppa almost require a 2.4.0 kernel,

m68k is not ready AFAIK. There are some experimental patches that make some modesl work in 2.4 (mostly Geert's).

Signature · 5 lines
Meelis Roos ([email protected])
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
#3 lore raw
In reply to Petr Vandrovec
Quoted 9 lines · Ben Collins
Quoted 5 lines
Quoted 2 lines

Do programs compiled against a glibc with LFS (2.4.x kernel) support, and using that LFS support, work on kernel 2.2.x machines?

Yes. Even glibc (2.2) compiled against kernel without LFS support has LFS interface. Of course limited to 2GB files only.

On some platforms...

E.g. I can already access > 2gig files on my ultrasparc :)

And I can do so on Alpha, which has forever had 64-bit file sizes also at the kernel side.

All glibc since 2.1 have user-visible interfaces of 64-bit file-sizes, but the glibc/kernel interface depends on what kernel headers have been used when compiling glibc.

Just for comparison, RedHat delivers glibc compiled with 2.3.nn/2.4.0 headers -> newer interfaces are supported.

Quoted 3 lines

Ben

/  Ben Collins  --  ...on that fantastic voyage...  --  Debian GNU/Linux   \
`  [email protected]  --  [email protected]  --  [email protected]  '

/Matti Aarnio
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

#4 lore raw
In reply to Petr Vandrovec
Quoted 4 lines
	Just for comparison, RedHat delivers glibc compiled with
	2.3.nn/2.4.0 headers -> newer interfaces are supported.

Let's not even get started on what RH did or did not do. If everyone did what RH did, then everyone else can just roll over and die, since there will be no difference between dists.

On top of that, let's take this off the l-k list, since it has no bearing here.

Signature · 8 lines
 -----------=======-=-======-=========-----------=====------------=-=------
/  Ben Collins  --  ...on that fantastic voyage...  --  Debian GNU/Linux   \
`  [email protected]  --  [email protected]  --  [email protected]  '
 `---=========------=======-------------=-=-----=-===-======-------=--=---'
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
#5 lore raw
In reply to Petr Vandrovec

In article <[email protected]>,

Quoted 5 lines · Ben Collins

work in our transition mechanisms. IOW, we don't have to just worry about 1 architecture and 1 distribution, we have to make sure upgrades work, make sure things don't break, and ensure backward compatibility is retained for 5 architectures that have released already (new archs don't need a transisition obviously).

Euhm, we released 6 architectures (arm, alpha, i386, m68k, powerpc and sparc)

Wichert.

Signature · 8 lines
   ________________________________________________________________
 / Generally uninteresting signature - ignore at your convenience  \
| [email protected]                  http://www.liacs.nl/~wichert/ |
| 1024D/2FA3BC2D 576E 100B 518D 2F16 36B0  2805 3CB8 9250 2FA3 BC2D |
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/