Skip to content

Conversation

@pietrygamat
Copy link
Collaborator

Keep building on the same stack we did 2.9.6 is the simplest fix to #190

@tresf
Copy link

tresf commented Jun 6, 2025

Thanks!

  • Since the commits are on your fork, I think this prevents us from manually running the workflow to create the binaries.
  • Locking the system into an older dockcross ref: I assume this would prevent us from using improvements or updates from upstream? So as a long-term solution, I believe we should ideally (eventually) use an upstream-maintained container specifically intended for compatibility with older glibc versions (if such a thing exists, if not we may want to PR this against dockcross). This seems like a simple stop-gap for the interm however.
  • Furthermore -- I think I understand the desired simplicity of this approach -- but I'm uncertain if applying this to Windows builds has any benefit? Windows binaries shouldn't normally link against glibc and would generally be out of scope for Is glibc 2.35 required now? #190 if my memory serves correctly.

@pietrygamat pietrygamat merged commit 777c0d2 into java-native:master Jun 10, 2025
40 checks passed
@pietrygamat pietrygamat deleted the glibc-compat branch June 10, 2025 07:01
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants