|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
|
Re: [PLUG] RedHat 7.1 glibc2.1 Backward compat - revisited
|
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 12:45:28PM -0400, William Shank wrote:
> align bits properly?
These are things I've picked up reading the lkml, I'm not an expert. I
haven't taken a design or architecture course, just relaying what I've
'picked up'. If there's no need for proper bit ordering in binaries
then excuse my ignorance.
Tim
>
> i don't recall learning about that in my computer design and architecture
> classes?
>
> is that for real? if so, please point me to somewhere I can read up on bit
> alignment in the kernel.
>
> it sounds fishy to me.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Tim Peeler
> To: plug@lists.phillylinux.org
> Sent: 5/24/01 12:13 PM
> Subject: Re: [PLUG] RedHat 7.1 glibc2.1 Backward compat - revisited
>
> On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 12:08:47PM -0400, Fred K Ollinger wrote:
> > I'm not going to add to the debate, just remark that a broken
> > compiler can easily fixed by downloading the 'approved' ver and
> compiling
> > that w/ the 'broken' compiler. Then use the 'fixed' compiler and
> compile
> > again and reinstall. Now everything should be compliant. Someone
> please
> > tell me if this is wrong.
> >
> > Also, how can a compiler be incompatible w/ a kernel. What does
> The kernel needs the compiler to align bits properly, inline functions
> properly, initialize static values in the binary properly and hundreds
> of other things. If it doesn't do this, your kernel won't boot or it'll
> crash at random places. The gcc that RH ships doesn't do these things
> properly. So not only is the binary kernel it produces wrong, the
> binary
> libs are wrong too. Think of it as a translator during a peace talk,
> if the translator fubars the translation you could get WWIII.
>
> > this mean. Does this mean that binaries it produces don't run on the
> > kernel? Then it truly is broken and you need new rpm to fix unless
> > there's some other way of bootstrapping. If the later scenerios are
> the
> > case then rh is total crap. If not, then it's just slightly broken.
> Not
> > that I'm defending _anyone_. I would just like to get the technical
> stuff
> > worked out. I take all my advocacy arguments to cola. I like this
> group
> > b/c there's little advocacy so I'm learning more instead of getting
> worked
> > up. :)
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Philadelphia Linux Users Group - http://www.phillylinux.org
> Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
> General Discussion - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________________
> Philadelphia Linux Users Group - http://www.phillylinux.org
> Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
> General Discussion - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug
>
______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group - http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion - http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug
|
|