Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs

[wingel@t1.ctrl-c.liu.se]

In article <20000731211810.B28169@thune.mrc-home.org> dalgoda@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 03:13:55PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Unfortunately that doesn't work very well.  For user-space daemons
>> which talk to Linux-specific kernel interfaces, such as automount, you
>> need both the glibc and the Linux kernel headers.
>
>Does this mean that automount has to be rebuilt for every kernel?  And that
>we should be running /lib/modules/`uname -r`/sbin/automount.
>
>It's sounds like it's an awful lot like a loadable module in how tightly
>it's tied to the kernel.  And how a kernel change can break things
>horribly.  How you have to be built against the one you're going to run
>against and not the one glibc was built against.

It only means that the application will be built agains the kernel 
_interface_ that was present in that version of the kernel.  And 
syscall/ioctl interfaces should never change, they can be added to,
and relly old depreciated interfaces can be removed, but they should
be stable for at least a few major kernel releases.

  /Christer
-- 
"Just how much can I get away with and still go to heaven?"

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/