Bug#713914: Add more information why libc is not usable with Linux kernel < 2.6.32
Package: libc6
Version: 2.13-38
Severity: wishlist
When updating Squeeze to Wheezy, I encountered the following error on
two separate machines:
WARNING: this version of the GNU libc requires kernel version
2.6.26 or later. Please upgrade your kernel before installing
glibc.
It would be very helpful to add more information why 2.6.26 is required,
and what would break when using an older kernel.
For example:
- Does this libc not run at all on older kernels (say because of a new
syscall interface used)?
- is just one specific feature broken (say NSS)?
- will it be much slower because of feature XY?
- etc.
Background on why this would be useful:
One system where I encountered this problem is a work computer running
an old SuSE version (which I can't upgrade for various reasons); I have
a Debian chroot there for when I need newer Linux software. The other
system is a vServer I bought (at hosteurope.com). I have no control over
the kernel used there (currently 2.6.18). Both these systems are
currently in a half-upgraded state until I determine that I can override
this requirement (probably by replacing uname with a script returning fake
information). If that is not possible, I'll have to somehow rollback the
upgrade or restore from backup.
Knowing the reason behind the refusal to install would be very helpful
when determining what to do next.
Side node: I can understand if such old kernels cannot be supported, but
it would be nice to make the failure mode a bit nicer. Currently it is:
update runs half-through, then libc install aborts, and further package
installation is impossible, because libc is not configured, and cannot
be configured, because it would need a newer kernel. apt-get then
refuses to install other packages (e.g. I couldn't install reportbug on
the affected system anymore).
The requirement for a new kernel should also really be mentioned in the
release notes. I read them before upgrading the vServer, and still ended
up with a broken system.
Best regards
Thomas
Reply to: