[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#218516: linux-kernel-headers: Check for symbolic link before installing



Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Sat, Nov 01, 2003 at 10:23:09PM +0100, Eric Valette wrote:

Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:


Come on, there are a dozen FAQs explaining this.  The kernel headers
used to compile user space applications MUST MATCH THE HEADERS THAT
GLIBC WAS COMPILED AGAINST.  Period.  If you want to compile
applications against a different set of kernel headers use -I at your
own risk.

Come on, read the LKML and everybody there seems to agree that *only* sanitised kernel headers should be used and not the plain kernel headers because only few data structure definition and constants are really requiered to compile any ANSI applications. There are already some bug reports, expects others or at least let people do things by checking *needed* symbolic links...


What does this have to do with your problem?

Just the tone and the *come on* of your previous answer that seems to imply, what you have done is obvious and perfect. I have been compiling and using application and user mode drivers for years patching the includes to get accurate kernel data structure and API definitions. This does *of course* not break debian compiled application and sometimes saved my ass when libc-dev includes were innacurate.

So my request is to include the *asm-generic symbolic link check* as
	1) it doesn't hurt people following the standart way
2) but will avoid many errors to people that have been doing the includes tricks for good reasons for years.

Of course we need sanitized kernel headers.  No one's _written_ an
adequate set yet. Until that happens this is what we need to do.

Why 2.6 kernel headers when official debian install kernel is hardly 2.4?

Adding symlinks to point at your current kernel version is even less
sanitized than using what we provide.

At least I have 2.4 includes and data structures :-) For me having a wrong data structure for user mode drivers is far worse than having a wrong GLIBC for some recompiled by hand applications...

And by the way, I find providing the kernel headers used to compile the LIBC necessary but just do not want it to corrupt possible existing symbolic links. You already do some checks, do one more.


--
   __
  /  `                   	Eric Valette
 /--   __  o _.          	6 rue Paul Le Flem
(___, / (_(_(__         	35740 Pace

Tel: +33 (0)2 99 85 26 76	Fax: +33 (0)2 99 85 26 76
E-mail: eric.valette@free.fr




Reply to: