Headers was RE: PROPOSAL -- new group to handle multi-project tasks
dbn.lists at gmail.com
Sat Jun 3 10:09:54 PDT 2006
On 6/3/06, pak_lfs at freemail.gr <pak_lfs at freemail.gr> wrote:
> I 've been using David 's patches and Jim 's headers script on my new
> experimental build. As it has been said here already, there are two, fairly
> distinct patches:
Cool. I was hoping that someone would play around with the David Woodhouse stuff this that is probably the closest to "upstream's intentions."
> * git-hdrcleanup.patch
> ( Which generally just moves stuff around in order to put internal stuff
> inside #ifdef __KERNEL__ et al and remove bogus includes like <config.h> )
> * git-hdrinstall.patch
> ( Which creates a new Makefile target "headers_install. This runs selected
> headers through unifdef and installs them in /lib/modules/VERSION/kabi
> IIRC )
> Btw, both of these patches are in the latest -mm.
> I believe the first has the most chances to be merged soon (2.6.18), since
> belongs to the kind of patches linus himself had _welcomed_ some time ago.
It seems like the header cleanups will definitely happen, but the make headers_install, who knows.
> The headers installed in kabi/ are currently not of much use, without
> even more sanitizing (which is probably done in glibc-kernheaders?).
Yes, there's more sanitizing in glibc-kernheaders.spec, but it is fairly simple. A little bit of massaging, then one big sed on all the headers. I have unpacked a recent SRPM and spec here:
> So, my proposal for the headers is after the 6.2 release, when the trunk
> switches to new gcc/glibc, that we should use Jim 's script. This will be
> a solution for at least six months - a year, since it really doesn't seem
> upstream will have fixed things until then.
It's seeming like a better proposal as more time goes by. Plus, I think when the header cleanups and possibly `headers_install' target get in upstream, there'll be a much stabler base to play from. We should be able to diff our headers against the RedHat ones, too, as a sanity check.
More information about the lfs-dev