Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

sm-discuss - Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.5/2.6.1

sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>
  • To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] glibc 2.5/2.6.1
  • Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 18:37:51 +0200

On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 12:55:31AM +0200, Thomas Orgis wrote:
> Am Sun, 12 Aug 2007 15:58:51 +0200
> schrieb Arwed von Merkatz <v.merkatz AT gmx.net>:
>
> > On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 01:55:09PM +0200, Ladislav Hagara wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Maybe we could create a linux-headers spell that would run the make
> > > >> install_headers target from whichever linux one has installed atm...
> > > > I mentioned this a couple of times to alley_cat since I thought he was
> > > > working on this (kinda) you're welcome to use the headers I have [0].
> > > > This is done using a script and auto-generates the tarballs.
> > > >
> > > > [0] http://dmlb2000.homelinux.org/pub/kernel-headers/
> > > >
> > > > You're most certainly welcome to use them they are made by simply
> > > > running make headers install for all arches supported.
> > >
> > >
> > > LFS also does "make headers_install" and cp them to /usr/include [1].
> > > Our linux-headers spell could create /usr/include/linux from
> > > /usr/src/linux (our linux spell or just linux sources).
> > > It might be OK just "ln -s /usr/src/linux/include/linux/
> > > /usr/include/linux". Just testing, looks OK.
> >
> > Just so we don't repeat old mistakes, symlinking is not the recommended
> > solution and hasn't been for years.
> Every time /usr/include/linux as symlink is mentioned, I remember Linus'
> rant on this topic back in 2000:
>
> http://linuxmafia.com/faq/Kernel/usr-src-linux-symlink.html
>
> I guess the main point is still clear: No symlink, instead copy the kernel
> headers glibc was compiled with.
> Regardless of the user using linux spell or not; just including some (newer)
> set of the headers that works as copy iun /usr/include/linux should do the
> trick.

That's what I was thinking about, I was just too lazy to look for the
reference :)
Having a defined set of headers installed is probably better than using
whatever current kernel is installed, if only for reproducability when
bugs crop up.

> > when we go back to vanilla kernel headers, the glibc spell should use
> > the headers in /usr/src/linux and afterwards copy them to /usr/include.
>
> I think we should stick with including/preparing a tarball with the headers
> independent of actually installed kernel.
>
>
> > That said, I've been using the symlink solution for a while now on my
> > system and haven't run into any major issues.
>
> Well, one could delete /usr/src/linux (or move it elsewhere)... should one
> expect the glibc kernel headers to disappear?

I'm just using the symlink because it was the fastest way to set up for
testing, never meant this as a solution for our spell.

--
Arwed v. Merkatz Source Mage GNU/Linux developer
http://www.sourcemage.org




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page