On 24 July 2012 14:27, Chris Larson <clar...@kergoth.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:37 AM, Radu Moisan <radu.moi...@intel.com> wrote: >> I have not tested on CentOS 5.8 if the applications are not broken in some >> way, but that's not in the scope of this patch. If something does indeed >> break, then a totally different patch is required, targeting a backport of >> kmod for kernel older than 2.6.23. > > Personally, I'd rather see the build fail than have the tools behave > incorrectly in some inexplicable way. If you haven't tested it, the > patch shouldn't go in.
I was curious... There are two commits in kmod where the cloexec changes were made: http://git.profusion.mobi/cgit.cgi/kmod.git/log/?qt=grep&q=cloexec The changes were a simple addition of the O_CLOEXEC flag, so this patch is simply the union of those two commits. A release of kmod that doesn't require O_CLOEXEC has the same behaviour as this patch. The problem O_CLOEXEC is solving isn't possible to solve cleanly without it. Using an older version of kmod instead of patching kmod to work on older systems would result in more bugs and less features for no win. Ross _______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list Openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
