[OpenAFS] why linux sysnames are different

Wed, 2 Jan 2008 17:14:32 -0500

------=_Part_44226_32267809.1199312072362
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Hi,

I want to know why the sysnames for Linux platform are named diffrently
than it is done for other platforms. On Linux we have sysnames,
i386_linux24,
i386_linux26 etc which is named after kernel version whereas the same is
done after OS version like rs_aix52, rs_aix53, sun4x_59, sun4x_510 etc for
other platforms.

According to the AFS semantics, the binaries under a sysname should be
able to run on all systems with the same sysname, if I am right.

However, considering Linux here, OS versions can get significant changes
over time and we may not be advanced to 2.8.x kernel. So in this case,
sysname would still be same 'i386_linux26' but the binaries may not run
across.

Considering the changes done in ELF format replacing SHT_HASH section
by SHT_GNU_HASH, the binaries built (with default options) on RHEL-5 would
not
work on RHEL-4, both happen to have 2.6.x kernel.

So If a user builds his program "bigtest" on RHEL5 and puts it under @sys
area
and tries to run the same from RHEL4, which would point to the same binary,
and
this would not work.

As of now, the RHEL-5 user should make use of linker option
"-Wl,--hash-style=sysv"
if he plans to put under @sys directory.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks.

   ~avinesh

------=_Part_44226_32267809.1199312072362
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Hi, I want to know why the sysnames for Linux platform are named diffrently than it is done for other platforms. On Linux we have sysnames, i386_linux24, i386_linux26 etc which is named after kernel version whereas the same is 
 done after OS version like rs_aix52, rs_aix53, sun4x_59, sun4x_510 etc for other platforms. According to the AFS semantics, the binaries under a sysname should be able to run on all systems with the same sysname, if I am right.
 However, considering Linux here, OS versions can get significant changes over time and we may not be advanced to 2.8.x kernel. So in this case, sysname would still be same &#39;i386_linux26&#39; but the binaries may not run across.
 Considering the changes done in ELF format replacing SHT_HASH section by SHT_GNU_HASH, the binaries built (with default options) on RHEL-5 would not work on RHEL-4, both happen to have 2.6.x kernel. 
 So If a user builds his program &quot;bigtest&quot; on RHEL5 and puts it under @sys area and tries to run the same from RHEL4, which would point to the same binary, and this would not work. As of now, the RHEL-5 user should make use of linker option &quot;-Wl,--hash-style=sysv&quot;
 if he plans to put under @sys directory. Please correct me if I am wrong. Thanks. &nbsp;&nbsp; ~avinesh

------=_Part_44226_32267809.1199312072362--