[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported
From: |
Sam James |
Subject: |
bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported |
Date: |
Tue, 06 Jun 2023 06:26:37 +0100 |
User-agent: |
mu4e 1.10.3; emacs 29.0.91 |
Sam James <sam@gentoo.org> writes:
> [[PGP Signed Part:Undecided]]
>
> Paul Eggert <eggert@cs.ucla.edu> writes:
>
>> On 2023-06-03 06:54, Mike Gilbert wrote:
>>> In this case, headers from linux-6.1 are being used at build time.
>>> However, the code is being run on a linux-4.19 kernel.
>>
>> Gnulib doesn't support that. If you build with headers from a
>> particular version of the operating system, you can't necessarily run
>> on older versions. The reasons for this sort of restriction should be
>> obvious.
>>
>
> This is a principle that other core parts of userland have no issue
> with. For example, util-linux has various fallbacks based on the
> *runtime* kernel version.
>
> This doesn't square with reality, anyway: if I install linux-6.1
> and its headers, then I downgrade, I need to then rebuild every
> piece of the userland I built against the new headers. Tracking
> that as a user is nontrivial.
>
>> If Gentoo builds are regularly targeting older kernels or libraries
>> than the platform they are building on, then surely that's a problem
>> in general, not just here.
>
> Now, continuing from what I said above, it's not feasible to *require*
> users to use a kernel from the package manager. Not only do users want
> to be able to run their own kernel (sometimes even just for a quick
> test), but this is completely incompatible with having multiple kernels
> installed in parallel, as you can't have multiple versions of the
> same linux-headers in /usr/include.
>
> Going further: are we really suggesting that someone who was using
> say, Linux 6.1 for a few days, then downgrades to Linux 5.15 to test
> something is in an unsupported configuration?
>
> This isn't a practical position to have. This assumption *barely*
> holds for binary distributions where you "upgrade the world" all
> at once, and as I said, it's questionable there. And it's completely
> incompatible with source-based distributions.
Just to be clear: I totally agree this isn't feasible for general
libraries (and their headers). It's just that linux-headers is
a special case, because you can't easily juggle different versions of
it, and it's expected that users may vary their kernel version.
Also, glibc says the latest should always be fine:
https://sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/FAQ#What_version_of_the_Linux_kernel_headers_should_be_used.3F.
Of course, gnulib isn't glibc, but I'm pointing out that this is
established practice.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Sam James, 2023/06/02
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Pádraig Brady, 2023/06/02
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Paul Eggert, 2023/06/03
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Mike Gilbert, 2023/06/03
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Arsen Arsenović, 2023/06/03
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Paul Eggert, 2023/06/06
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Paul Eggert, 2023/06/06
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Sam James, 2023/06/06
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported,
Sam James <=
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Paul Eggert, 2023/06/06
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Pádraig Brady, 2023/06/06
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Sam James, 2023/06/06
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Pádraig Brady, 2023/06/06
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Paul Eggert, 2023/06/07
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Sam James, 2023/06/07
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Paul Eggert, 2023/06/07
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Arsen Arsenović, 2023/06/08
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Paul Eggert, 2023/06/08
- bug#63850: cp fails for files > 2 GB if copy offload is unsupported, Pádraig Brady, 2023/06/03