public inbox for frysk@sourceware.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* Fedora Core 5 closed
@ 2007-07-05 14:29 Andrew Cagney
  2007-07-05 15:15 ` Mark Wielaard
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2007-07-05 14:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: frysk

Just FYI, I've closed the Fedora Core 5 tracker, and largely removed the 
fc5 specific checks.

Note however, this doesn't mean that we're free of the pre-utrace 
kernels.  RHEL 4 and other non-utrace systems live on :-)

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: Fedora Core 5 closed
  2007-07-05 14:29 Fedora Core 5 closed Andrew Cagney
@ 2007-07-05 15:15 ` Mark Wielaard
  2007-07-05 16:09   ` Andrew Cagney
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 3+ messages in thread
From: Mark Wielaard @ 2007-07-05 15:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Andrew Cagney; +Cc: frysk

On Thu, 2007-07-05 at 10:29 -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
> Just FYI, I've closed the Fedora Core 5 tracker, and largely removed the 
> fc5 specific checks.

Would it make sense to have maintainers for the various platforms we are
interested in, then we can just ask whether someone wants to maintain
such an old platform tracker bug. I am mainly interested in Fedora 6
(x86_64) and Fedora 7 (x86) so I could take those two till I upgrade for
example.

> Note however, this doesn't mean that we're free of the pre-utrace 
> kernels.  RHEL 4 and other non-utrace systems live on :-)

Does that really matter? utrace doesn't have a userspace interface
except though ptrace. If there are any differences in behavior then they
are probably bugs in the ptrace layer. Or is there something else to
watch out for between ptrace/utrace enabled kernels?

Cheers,

Mark

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

* Re: Fedora Core 5 closed
  2007-07-05 15:15 ` Mark Wielaard
@ 2007-07-05 16:09   ` Andrew Cagney
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 3+ messages in thread
From: Andrew Cagney @ 2007-07-05 16:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Mark Wielaard; +Cc: frysk

Mark Wielaard wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-07-05 at 10:29 -0400, Andrew Cagney wrote:
>   
>> Just FYI, I've closed the Fedora Core 5 tracker, and largely removed the 
>> fc5 specific checks.
>>     
>
> Would it make sense to have maintainers for the various platforms we are
> interested in, then we can just ask whether someone wants to maintain
> such an old platform tracker bug. I am mainly interested in Fedora 6
> (x86_64) and Fedora 7 (x86) so I could take those two till I upgrade for
> example.
>   

There are distro specific packagers; but beyond that we should all be 
taking responsibility for the systems we use.

>   
>> Note however, this doesn't mean that we're free of the pre-utrace 
>> kernels.  RHEL 4 and other non-utrace systems live on :-)
>>     
>
> Does that really matter? utrace doesn't have a userspace interface
> except though ptrace. If there are any differences in behavior then they
> are probably bugs in the ptrace layer. Or is there something else to
> watch out for between ptrace/utrace enabled kernels?
>
>   
Sometimes it is a bug, sometimes is is a question of interpretation.  Cf 
KILL you recently asked about.

Andrew

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 3+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2007-07-05 16:09 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 3+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2007-07-05 14:29 Fedora Core 5 closed Andrew Cagney
2007-07-05 15:15 ` Mark Wielaard
2007-07-05 16:09   ` Andrew Cagney

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).