| 1 |
On 02/11/11 16:24, Diego Elio Pettenò wrote: |
| 2 |
> Il giorno ven, 11/02/2011 alle 14.23 +0100, Michael Haubenwallner ha |
| 3 |
> scritto: |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> But both that document as well as uncountable lines of source code are |
| 6 |
>> rather old. |
| 7 |
>> While the source code isn't that large a problem for Gentoo, existing |
| 8 |
>> binaries |
| 9 |
>> without source code still are. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Beside flash what else is involved for now? We can decide that once |
| 12 |
> that's defined. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I've heard a colleague of mine debugged for 50(!) hours after moving some |
| 15 |
quite old application to some recent Linux before he replaced a memcpy by |
| 16 |
memmove, so this did ring some bells. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
However, now he said this was on Ubuntu 10.04.1 LTS, having glibc-2.11, |
| 19 |
so this might have been unrelated indeed. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Anyway, running old applications on recent Linux is quite common in |
| 22 |
"enterprise" world (where Gentoo might not be such a big player). |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
So I'm fine with Gentoo shipping vanilla memcpy, I'm just curious |
| 25 |
if next RHEL will do. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
/haubi/ |
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Michael Haubenwallner |
| 30 |
Gentoo on a different level |
Archives