Re: Includes vs. headers in libc-dev package
> > Uh, where have you been the last week Bruce? The includes packages is
> > no longer needed, at least by libc, et al, and should be dropped.
>
> Where was I? I was waiting for you to realize that your strategy
> was broken and for you to fix it on your own.
If it is so broken, how was I able to convince three or four of those
who originally objected that the new approach is better?
> You broke building the kernel.
I've already covered this. It doesn't break. Unless you have
something new to add, I won't bother to repeat myself.
> You caused headers to be installed that
> mis-represented the running kernel. I've had to
> remove the entire /usr/include/asm directory tree every time I've
> installed your package. This should not be the case.
So your saying that only programs compiled with the running kernel can
be run with the running kernel? I guess I've just been lucky that
none of my programs compiled with slightly older kernel headers have
broken when I upgraded. Does Linus know that his new kernels have
been breaking everyone's systems?
> Probably, this should be fixed by having the headers you ship with
> libc behave exactly as the "includes" package does - the includes
> package installs a tree of headers under /usr/src/includes-<version>,
> and changes the symbolic links in /usr/include/asm and
> /usr/include/linux to point at the newly-installed
> /usr/src/includes-<version>.
That's no better than the previous approach.
> Please re-do the libc-dev package to co-operate with the "includes"
> and "source" packages in re-assigning the /usr/include/asm and
> /usr/include/linux symbolic links.
This won't happen as long as I'm maintaining libc. Your welcome to
find someone else to maintain it for Debian. I only took it over
because it was orphaned by Ian Murdock, and then again by Siggy
Brentrup.
David
--
David Engel Optical Data Systems, Inc.
david@ods.com 1101 E. Arapaho Road
(214) 234-6400 Richardson, TX 75081
Reply to: