new kernel install. instructions for book

Jesse Tie Ten Quee highos at highos.com
Tue Mar 13 16:49:33 PST 2001


Yo,

On Tue, Mar 13, 2001 at 01:04:03AM -0500, Gerard Beekmans wrote:
> A reason not to do so: apparently (i haven't read this myself yet) Glibc 
> suggests that /usr/include/linux|asm contain the same headers that were used 
> during the compilation of Glibc. I'm not sure why one suggests that. It will 
> be hard to test software against a future 2.5 or 2.6 kernel when the header 
> files are always of the one that glibc was installed with. That means 
> whenever you upgrade a kernel you would have to recompile Glibc as well. I 
> don't particularly like that idea, i've done it the above way (with symlinks 
> so include/linux|asm always contain headers that match the kernel that's in 
> RAM right now) and never caused problems.

Well...speaking for myself;

I always leave the kernel as-is in /usr/src/linux and never change it
nor upgrade it, and i've never had trouble using new "features" when
upgrading from say 2.2 to 2.4. (which end up in
/usr/src/kernel/linux-<version>)

My understanding of Glibc is that it is *quite* tied to the kernel
version headers it used, so take that as you will, i say we just copy
the kernel headers over, one less thing to worry about, imho..

I've heard from much more knowledgeable ppl then myself that it is a bad
idea to change the kernel in /usr/src/linux if you use symbolic links,
so.... (not to say doing so is bad, but perhaps it isn't as "clean" as
one would expect ;)

-
Jesse Tie Ten Quee - highos at highos dot com

-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to lfs-discuss-request at linuxfromscratch.org
and put unsubscribe in the subject header of the message




More information about the lfs-dev mailing list