[Pvfs2-developers] the epoll()-by-default experiment is a bust

[Rob Ross]

ok, so:
nothing gets you epoll if you pass execution test
--enable-epoll gets epoll w/only compile test, no execution test (for
                cross-compile people)
--disable-epoll just turns it off

pete? i understand your concern re: 2.6/2.4 people, but that should be a 
dying breed at this point...one extra step for them so that we do the 
right thing for the masses seems reasonable...

rob

Robert Latham wrote:
> On Thu, May 25, 2006 at 02:05:23PM -0500, Rob Ross wrote:
>> why don't we add a configure test that executes code to see if we get 
>> ENOSYS?
> 
> that might be a good-enough solution.  It leaves two issues:
> 
> - execution-based tests break cross compiling
> - Pete didn't like that pvfs2 libraries compiled on 2.6 systems were
>   not portable to 2.4 
> 
> For the former, we can just never use epoll if we are cross compiling
> 
> For the later, people in pw's situation can configure with
> --disable-epoll
> 
> Fair enough?
> 
> ==rob
>