This web mail archive is frozen.
This page is part of a frozen web archive of this mailing list.
You can still navigate around this archive, but know that no new mails
have been added to it since July of 2016.
Click here to be taken to the new web archives of this list; it includes all the mails that are in this frozen archive plus all new mails that have been sent to the list since it was migrated to the new archives.
On Nov 12, 2009, at 8:48 AM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > On Nov 11, 2009, at 4:57 PM, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> > >Maybe what we can do is using PLPA's functions if __GLIBC__ is <=
> > >2 and __GLIBC_MINOR__ is < the first version which is known to be
> > >correct or if CPU_SET can't be compiled, and rely on the glibc
> > >functions else. Of course we have to rely on glibc in any case for
> > >pthread_setaffinity_np().
> > That sounds good. Even after glibc was fixed, "bad" versions of it
> > were still in many already-installed machines for many years
> And these had a minor number earlier than the fixed glibc, right?
Yes -- that's why I'm saying your plan sounds good. :-)
The *only* weird possibility would be if RH (or Suse) patched their
old glibcs to fix this problem but didn't update the minor number.
Things like this have happened before; it's why I always prefer
testing for behavior rather than version numbers.
But I don't quite know how to probe for this in the running glibc --
you *may or may not* encounter a problem if you have a size mismatch.
Version number might be the best that we can do here. :-\