[OpenAFS-devel] Initial concern about Linux 2.4 patch

[Chas Williams]

In message <Pine.LNX.3.95L.1001105191935.662a-100000@mariner.rem.cs.cmu.edu>,Je
ffrey Hutzelman writes:
>sysname 'i386_linux22' for their port because it was targeted at 2.2.x
>kernels, even though the distribution they targeted (RedHat 5.2) used the
>same glibc as the existing i386_linux3 systype.  Worse, they _kept_ the
>i386_linux22 sysname when they switched to supporting RedHat 6.x, which
>uses a newer glibc with a different and not-entirely-compatible ABI.

sys name used to be hardware_osversion, but with linux that system falls apart
since the os varies somewhat from linux to linux.  how about something
like i386_linux21? where 21 is the glibc version not the kernel version?
again glibc isnt a requirement for linux systems either (modern or not). 
i believe some people are porting the bsd userland to the linux kernel
environment.

>with 2.0 kernels, but also with late 1.2 kernels as well, IIRC).  The name
>change you're suggesting would result in two completely incompatible ABI's
>using the same sysname, which is far worse than having two sysnames for
>one ABI.

i was just following convention as i saw it. sorry. sue me.

>In any event, sysname assignment is going to be a messy issue.  For
>OpenAFS, we should let the gatekeepers handle sysname assignment.
>Ideally, developers should get a new sysname assigned _before_ starting
>to distribute code that uses it, in order to minimize the number of people

i could have asked the gatekeepers if they existed at the time i started
the port.  i suppose i could have asked transarc.  i wonder if i would
have gotten a reply.