Kernel Headers Nitpick

Jeremy Utley jeremy at
Mon Sep 27 17:54:39 PDT 2004

On Mon, September 27, 2004 4:02 pm, Matthew Burgess said:

> Having said that, glibc's _need_ for those headers is debatable, as some
> folks (including a libc-hacker) have successfully built glibc against
> the sanitized headers.

If you follow the thread on LKML where this issue originally came up, the
kernel developers specifically said that even glibc should build against
the sanitized headers, not raw kernel headers.  The ONLY thing that should
need the raw kernel headers are 3rd party modules, which should be
configured to look in /lib/modules/{kernel-version}/build/include to get
the raw headers for the kernel.

Unstable LFS is following this practice now, and has been for well over a
month, with limited issues (We still have to point ch5 glibc to the
headers, otherwise it tends to end up grabbing headers from the host).


More information about the lfs-dev mailing list