From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <michael.quicquaro@gmail.com>
Received: from mail-pb0-x235.google.com (mail-pb0-x235.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c01::235])
 by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CC54156
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 16:57:08 +0100 (CET)
Received: by mail-pb0-f53.google.com with SMTP id ma3so1456458pbc.26
 for <dev@dpdk.org>; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 07:58:06 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
 :cc:content-type;
 bh=LBef/2MJ2B/tjjjiCAF0eADD2HB10x0GJTV5Y6XFbaI=;
 b=bagWq2ygMcCt4qx1c6odAG7Kds0u3LHu11+dOBqNk6ZT7brGkhCKZ0cK9Uk0LRmIDF
 Ml7xvBxSzGkp7UiS3vRVOg9a7xLzvkVU07faiwwKf2lgMA5zIPZOXuvsAUEbVpWeaaCo
 XEkrAPblcChPeGH1iPD1CIhhMnmeSkNMpSM4nGTIeRlD+ql6Q5fRl6K8EnptE90iBFIa
 4Pbe3Z0M2jyNtbiFVXCjKoRixWIbuBuJQYjRqkLkVUR0xlob79SQwX3WRwBaaP5tICGI
 oOHHwSq0bbZFiFhDhRqVQCRMvDK/HIZ4EKh2iYIsZqlVI/JydfHjibe8ydaRevzQ4Gkb
 gdnw==
X-Received: by 10.68.189.101 with SMTP id gh5mr12343921pbc.39.1385135886063;
 Fri, 22 Nov 2013 07:58:06 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.70.69.66 with HTTP; Fri, 22 Nov 2013 07:57:45 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B01A975AA5@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
References: <CAAD-K951DjgTWDXBKACxyimP6j_vM-XN7hh8pFqfU217-6J3bg@mail.gmail.com>
 <59AF69C657FD0841A61C55336867B5B01A975AA5@IRSMSX103.ger.corp.intel.com>
From: Michael Quicquaro <michael.quicquaro@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 10:57:45 -0500
Message-ID: <CAAD-K96RoAaQObkGiHKikV75kJroHohZFYQNHjtASxOoNLFXGA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Richardson, Bruce" <bruce.richardson@intel.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.15
Cc: "dev@dpdk.org" <dev@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-dev] glibc 2.1
X-BeenThere: dev@dpdk.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: patches and discussions about DPDK <dev.dpdk.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/options/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@dpdk.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://dpdk.org/ml/listinfo/dev>,
 <mailto:dev-request@dpdk.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2013 15:57:08 -0000

Right, thanks.  I had a little brain fart.


On Fri, Nov 22, 2013 at 4:42 AM, Richardson, Bruce <
bruce.richardson@intel.com> wrote:

> The Intel DPDK should work fine on RHEL 6.4. There should be no need to
> update your glibc, since this is subversion 12 (> 7), rather than 1.2.
> Regards,
> /Bruce
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: dev [mailto:dev-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of Michael Quicquaro
> > Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2013 6:26 PM
> > To: dev@dpdk.org
> > Subject: [dpdk-dev] glibc 2.1
> >
> > Hello all,
> >
> > I have built dpdk (and pktgen-dpdk) on a couple RHEL 6.4 servers.  This
> > distribution comes with glibc 2.12
> >
> > I have read that glibc 2.7 is needed for coreset() functionality.  My
> testing,
> > at the moment, only requires one cpu core.
> >
> > I assume that upgrading to glibc 2.7 would probably break many of the
> > executables on this system.
> >
> > The build seemed to work fine.
> >
> > Do you think that there are any adverse effects of using a dpdk that was
> > built with glibc 2.1 in this case?
> >
> > - Mike
>