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

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Thu, 2011-07-07 at 15:34 +0100, 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.
> 
> 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?

I'd suggest yes...

Cheers,

Richard