Simon Geard wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-07-29 at 10:29 -0500, Mike McCarty wrote:
>> However, the one being _built_ is the one needing the hooks, not
>> the one running. As long as one has full source for everything
>> being built, and isn't relying upon the include files for the
>> one being run, it shouldn't matter.
>
> I'm guessing it has to do with building glibc against headers for a
> new kernel, but not actually running that kernel. And more
> specifically, what happens when software tries to use features which
> glibc claims to support, but the running kernel doesn't.
>
> Note how in the glibc build, we pass --enable-kernel=2.6.22.5, which
> configures it with the assumption that it will never need to run on an
> older kernel than 2.6.22.5 (which is of course the minimum version
> listed in Host System Requirements).
Does glibc use system call API or the kernel's code? The whole idea of
stability of an OS I would think would be when BIOS interrupts are triggered
and kernel problems happen that user space never sees the problem.
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
