[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Check linux 4

From: Chet Ramey
Subject: Re: Check linux 4
Date: Tue, 26 May 2015 16:52:28 -0400
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.10; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.6.0

Hash: SHA1

On 5/25/15 8:15 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On 25 May 2015 17:38, Chet Ramey wrote:
>> On 5/25/15 9:15 AM, isabella parakiss wrote:
>>> This is from configure.ac
>>> linux*)             LOCAL_LDFLAGS=-rdynamic          # allow dynamic loading
>>>             case "`uname -r`" in
>>>             2.[[456789]]*|3*)       AC_DEFINE(PGRP_PIPE) ;;
>>>             esac ;;
>>> It doesn't check for linux 4.
>> Two things:
>> 1. Is anyone actually using 4.0 in a distribution?
> all the rolling release distros ?  i've been running 4.0 pretty much sinc
e it
> came out.

Well, ok then. :-)

>> 2. If you're looking at bash-4.3, why would you have expected a version
>>    from a couple of years ago to check for it?
> to be fair, that's what the code looks like in git too ...

It does.  This is the first I heard that Linux 4 was released.

>> Between configure.ac and BASH_SYS_PGRP_SYNC, I imagine that it will be
>> covered when 4.0 makes it out to the world.
> can't we simply delete the uname check ?  it's wrong when cross-compiling
> redundant with the other macro.

Yeah, that's probably a good idea.  Having it enabled doesn't really hurt
anything, though, it's just a way to force synchronization that Linux

- -- 
``The lyf so short, the craft so long to lerne.'' - Chaucer
                 ``Ars longa, vita brevis'' - Hippocrates
Chet Ramey, ITS, CWRU    address@hidden    http://cnswww.cns.cwru.edu/~chet/
Version: GnuPG v2
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]