From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Petazzoni Date: Fri, 5 Aug 2016 23:30:33 +0200 Subject: [Buildroot] [PATCH] glibc: add version 2.24 In-Reply-To: <20160805212501.GB3009@haswell> References: <1470387567-64171-1-git-send-email-Vincent.Riera@imgtec.com> <20160805185348.4c0ff1fd@free-electrons.com> <2039F480-7B29-4B59-8F02-62125387E3F6@gmail.com> <20160805231747.768e6c08@free-electrons.com> <20160805212501.GB3009@haswell> Message-ID: <20160805233033.41c43841@free-electrons.com> List-Id: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: buildroot@busybox.net Hello, On Fri, 5 Aug 2016 14:25:01 -0700, Khem Raj wrote: > Its just not kernel headers, infact its the kernel proper version as well > which should be >= 3.2.0 Well, if your kernel headers are version X, surely you're running a kernel >= X. > you should also use --enable-kernel switch to detect the case where > someone might be using older kernel with glibc 2.24 and running into > issues at runtime. As said above, we make the assumption that if kernel headers version X were used, the user is running a kernel of version >= X. > IMO BR should deprecate older versions more agressively, and keep them > only on need basis. May be its against the objectives of the project > but you will be spread thin supporting so many combinations and > how to test them all. We already deprecate older versions quite aggressively. We're currently using glibc 2.23 (the latest until today), the latest uclibc-ng, the latest musl. We haven't switched to gcc 5 as the default yet (we're on gcc 4.9), but I'm planning on moving to gcc 5 as the default for the next Buildroot release, i.e 2016.11. Thomas -- Thomas Petazzoni, CTO, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com