From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 10 20:50:32 2006 Return-Path: X-Original-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8493216A403 for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 20:50:32 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz) Received: from eva.fit.vutbr.cz (eva.fit.vutbr.cz [147.229.176.14]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCE9443D4C for ; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 20:50:31 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from xdivac02@stud.fit.vutbr.cz) Received: from eva.fit.vutbr.cz (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by eva.fit.vutbr.cz (envelope-from xdivac02@eva.fit.vutbr.cz) (8.13.8/8.13.7) with ESMTP id k9AKoSnx046598 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Tue, 10 Oct 2006 22:50:28 +0200 (CEST) Received: (from xdivac02@localhost) by eva.fit.vutbr.cz (8.13.8/8.13.3/Submit) id k9AKoSHu046597; Tue, 10 Oct 2006 22:50:28 +0200 (CEST) Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 22:50:28 +0200 From: Divacky Roman To: Tijl Coosemans Message-ID: <20061010205028.GA46503@stud.fit.vutbr.cz> References: <20061005231338.GB59300@math.jussieu.fr> <94295941@srv.sem.ipt.ru> <20061010103527.piel5y04ggswc8sg@webmail.leidinger.net> <200610101307.22437.tijl@ulyssis.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200610101307.22437.tijl@ulyssis.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4.2.2i X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 147.229.176.14 Cc: Alexander Leidinger , freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Linux & Maple X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2006 20:50:32 -0000 On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 01:07:21PM +0200, Tijl Coosemans wrote: > On Tuesday 10 October 2006 10:35, Alexander Leidinger wrote: > > Now, the interesting question is: what kernel API changed between > > 2.4.2 and 2.4.20, and do we support it? > > I think the answer to that is no. The changes appear to be threading > related. I'm guessing here, but I wouldn't be surprised if 2.4.20 > introduced NPTL support. I dont think such a big change as NPTL is introduced in the middle of stable branch. not even in linux ;) I agree that its threading related but not NPTL