lkml on kernel headers and glibc (et al)

Greg Schafer gschafer at zip.com.au
Wed May 28 19:55:58 PDT 2003


On Wed, May 28, 2003 at 09:50:10PM -0400, Zack Winkles wrote:
> Jason Gurtz (jason at tommyk.com) wrote:
> > Here's, once again, hoping this will be resolved quite shortly, hopefully
> > via the mythical "sanitized-headers-x.x.x" package.
> 
> If anybody gives a damn, I keep RedHat's equivalent package in ~winkie.
> I've compiled all sorts of systems off them in the past week or so,
> ranging from GCC 2.95.3 to GCC 3.3, and glibc 2.1.3 to glibc 2.3.3 CVS.
> Both NPTL and linuxthreads. It works like a charm.

"works like a charm" is not the solution! :-)

Anyone can download the rh SRPM. One of the points made in that lkml thread
was that 1 dude decides what gets sainitized and what doesn't. He happens to
work for rh. This is not an ideal situation. Glibc devlopment is controlled
by rh. It is in rh's interest to have good headers to compile against, so
one cannot fault the logic of them getting an employee to maintain them.

Here is a bold prediction :-)

Unless a "Kernel ABI Headers" project gets off the ground, everyone (us
included) will end up having to use the rh maintained headers.


But let's stop and think about it for a minute. Vast amounts of toolchain
software is already manintained by rh employees. Will it be such a big deal
if this also applies to the kernel headers? Probably not.

Greg
-- 
Unsubscribe: send email to listar at linuxfromscratch.org
and put 'unsubscribe lfs-dev' in the subject header of the message



More information about the lfs-dev mailing list