unless I misunderstand something (which is entirely possible), the Suse "solution" is only a partial solution... they will compile shared objects for each of the instruction set possibilities and load the one that is applicable on the current machine.
but doesn't that mean that all the base apps need to be compiled for the lowest common denominator? In the examples people (in this thread) are worrying about, that would be "v2".
Fred
On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 7:45 AM aleksander.baranowski via CentOS-devel < centos-devel@centos.org> wrote:
As far as the idea (glibc-hwcaps) is concerned, both are pretty much the same.
I think
https://gitlab.com/x86-psABIs/x86-64-ABI/-/jobs/artifacts/master/raw/x86-64-... is a good read. It's fresh and it might be appropriate to read it first before entering the deeper discussion.
If Fedora manages to maintain baselines, the downstream might follow (CentOS Stream, RHEL 10). I don't think it will be mainstream the other way around. Also if production started it might be hard to push such a huge change ¯_(ツ)_/¯.
Best, Alex
On 1/8/24 12:49, František Šumšal wrote:
On 1/8/24 12:46, Trevor Hemsley via CentOS-devel wrote:
I do think the SuSE method of dealing with this is significantly better and I wish RH would adopt it rather than just deprecating otherwise working hardware:
https://www.theregister.com/2023/03/09/opensuse_finds_x86_64_solution/
FWIW Fedora is currently considering this as well:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Optimized_Binaries_for_the_AMD64_Arch...
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel
CentOS-devel mailing list CentOS-devel@centos.org https://lists.centos.org/mailman/listinfo/centos-devel