lkml on kernel headers and glibc (et al)
dss-lfs at cfl.rr.com
Wed May 28 21:04:06 PDT 2003
Ken Dyke wrote:
> On Wednesday 28 May 2003 20:55, Greg Schafer wrote:
>>Will it be such a big deal
>>if this also applies to the kernel headers? Probably not.
> Probably not. At least not today. Probably not tomorrow either. But RedHat
> is developing two very different products these days (and the difference will
> only get bigger). The enterprise edition is serveral hundred dollars a copy.
> It is meant to be very stable. The comsumer desktop edition is pushing the
> bleeding beta edge more each day. I think RedHat has come to see it as a
> testing ground for packages that after a year of beta testing by millions of
> consumers gets merged into their corporate product line.
> Now, all this is fine and dandy. And I hope RedHat makes money. But that
> does not necessarily mean that RedHat's best interests are my best interests.
> As was evidenced in the lkml thread the RedHat employee responsible for the
> headers package was not very forth coming as to how he decided what went in.
> Looking at the changelog in the spec file from the srpm other RH employees
> contribute to the maintenance of the package.
> P.S. Zack, thank you for making your headers package available. I'll ask for
> a URL if I can't find them when I eventually go looking for them.
And I still don't understand the kernel guys' stance on this. They
provide the interface so why not the header files? In my opinion,
they're just lazy.
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