[lttng-dev] Patches to enable building on CentOS 5.x (glibc 2.5)

[David OShea]

Hi all,

Since there is more than one user interested in old glibc versions, does that mean we might be able to get the support into mainline?

Thanks in advance,
David

> -----Original Message-----
> From: yin sun [mailto:sunyin51 at gmail.com]
> Sent: Saturday, 18 May 2013 12:51 AM
> To: David OShea
> Cc: Brosseau, Yannick; lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org
> Subject: Re: [lttng-dev] Patches to enable building on CentOS 5.x
> (glibc 2.5)
> 
> Support lower version of glibc does provide value. In my case, it will
> enable me easily port to existing production system, which is always
> several versions behind.
> 
> Thanks,
> /Yin
> 
> On Thu, May 16, 2013 at 11:52 PM, David OShea <David.OShea at quantum.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi Yannick,
> >
> >
> >
> > Yes, we patched the latest (as of around a month ago) versions to
> work on
> > CentOS 5.  Sorry, I neglected to mention that this is for UST only,
> not
> > kernel tracing, hence my not saying anything about the modules!
> >
> >
> >
> > If the changes aren't going to go upstream into the git repositories,
> I
> > imagine there is more chance of the CentOS 5 support becoming broken
> -
> > something could be committed upstream that requires further patching,
> or
> > conflicts with the patches.  In this case, then, I don't think EPEL
> packages
> > would help us much, and quite possibly nobody else is interested in
> CentOS 5
> > :)  Also, we needed to backport some lttng-ust commits from master to
> get
> > support for dynamic trace providers to work, so we're more interested
> in
> > seeing future releases include the changes than seeing a patched
> version of
> > the current release, and therefore I don't think there would be any
> value in
> > us moving to an EPEL package for the same version of LTTng that we're
> > already using.
> >
> >
> >
> > I can certainly provide the patches to you anyway, but I'm not so
> keen to
> > spend time improving them if they're not going upstream, e.g. one
> thing I
> > think needs to be investigated is whether the kernel versions
> provided by
> > CentOS 5 include the system calls that we had to add wrappers for; I
> haven't
> > paid any attention to what kernel version I'm using, I'm not sure if
> it is a
> > standard CentOS 5 one.
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks!
> > David
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > From: Brosseau, Yannick [mailto:yannick.brosseau at gmail.com]
> > Sent: Friday, 17 May 2013 12:44 AM
> > To: David OShea
> > Cc: lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org
> > Subject: Re: [lttng-dev] Patches to enable building on CentOS 5.x
> (glibc
> > 2.5)
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > So you made it work with CentOS 5?
> >
> > I don't know if we want it upstream, but I could maybe use them to
> build a
> > package for EPEL5.
> >
> > Yannick
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 7:38 AM, David OShea
> <David.OShea at quantum.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Would contributions of patches to enable lttng-tools and lttng-ust to
> build
> > with glibc 2.5 (as is shipped with CentOS 5.x) and to enable lttng-
> gen-tp to
> > run with Python 2.4 (as shipped on CentOS 5.x) be accepted?
> >
> > What is missing from glibc 2.5 is:
> >
> > - a system call wrapper for sched_getcpu()
> > - a system call wrapper for sync_file_range()
> > - htobe32() and other similar endian conversion functions
> >
> > babeltrace and userspace-rcu did not require patching.
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> > David
> >
> > P.S. If you see this, thanks for all your recent replies, Mathieu, I
> will
> > try to get back to you soon!
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > The information contained in this transmission may be confidential.
> Any
> > disclosure, copying, or further distribution of confidential
> information is
> > not permitted unless such privilege is explicitly granted in writing
> by
> > Quantum. Quantum reserves the right to have electronic
> communications,
> > including email and attachments, sent across its networks filtered
> through
> > anti virus and spam software programs and retain such messages in
> order to
> > comply with applicable data security and retention requirements.
> Quantum is
> > not responsible for the proper and complete transmission of the
> substance of
> > this communication or for any delay in its receipt.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > lttng-dev mailing list
> > lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org
> > http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Yannick Brosseau
> > yannickbrosseau.com
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > lttng-dev mailing list
> > lttng-dev at lists.lttng.org
> > http://lists.lttng.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lttng-dev
> >