Re: Debian Specialities (fwd)
On 2 Jan 1997, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
srivasta > I mean, if the run time kernel api/data structures are
srivasta > irrelevant, how does it matter if you compile with the headers
srivasta > belonging to the kernel source you happen to have on your machine, as
srivasta > opposed to the headers packaged by the libc developer? Are the
srivasta > reasons technical, or aesthetic?
The issue is really not there in the 2.0.X or 1.2.X Versions since the
kernel interface is (supposed to be) stable. But
whenever we enter an development cycle like 1.3.X and 2.1.X then the
kernel interface becomes volatile. The longer the stable version is
out the more people will be using the unstable version and the more
problematic the issue becomes.
An example with dosemu are the new kernel modifications enabling the
advanced dosemu features. The interface changes and thus I have to
manually set the symlinks up to have the advanced features compiled into
The dosemu I maintain for debian does not include 2.1.X features and is
compiled purely for 2.0.27 which might even work for awhile on 2.1.X.
There are new features around the corner for dosemu. For example the
ability to run Windows Programs under X in a window which will be in high
demand leading into the 2.1.X kernel problems with the /usr/include
I am already considering setting up a local dosemu package for on Campus
use only. I have no idea how practical the Windows program are under
Dosemu but that is a feature we urgently want.
--- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ ---
PGP Public Key = FB 9B 31 21 04 1E 3A 33 C7 62 2F C0 CD 81 CA B5
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
debian-devel-REQUEST@lists.debian.org . Trouble? e-mail to Bruce@Pixar.com