Re: [PATCH 1/2] bitbake.conf: update OLDEST_KERNEL to 2.6.0

[Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com>]

On 07/07/2011 07:34 AM, Paul Eggleton wrote:
> On Thursday 07 July 2011 15:24:46 Koen Kooi wrote:
>> angstrom has been setting it to 2.6.16 for some years now, I forget which
>> bug that fixed over 2.6.0
>
> Personally I don't know enough about which crusty old 2.6 kernels people are
> still using out there, so I figured 2.6.0 was the safest bet.

If oe-core never supported older kernel than 2.6.37 then setting it to 
2.6.37 would be better IMO

>
> A trawl of the OE history turns up these two:
>
> -----------------------------------
> commit 8b0202e6e3f90a772df301e8522f9deb03e50132
> Author: Tom Rini<tom_rini@mentor.com>
> Date:   Wed Mar 3 12:17:38 2010 -0700
>
>      glibc*.inc: Bump OLDEST_KERNEL to 2.6.16
>
>      Per glibc's ChangeLog, 2.6.16 is the minimum required by at least glibc
>      2.9
>      Prior to this, it was a murky 2.6.14 + patches to 2.6.16 (when it was all
>      upstream).
> -----------------------------------
> commit 794e8652f5c4fef71a8b9ab834b39f75b99f9420
> Author: Koen Kooi<koen@openembedded.org>
> Date:   Thu May 21 20:30:37 2009 +0200
>
>      Angstrom 2009.X: set OLDEST_KERNEL to 2.6.16 to avoid problems with
> ppoll()
> -----------------------------------
>
> Any further comments/info? Should we be using 2.6.16 in oe-core as well?
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
>