Re: kernel-{image,headers} package bloat
On Wed, 25 Apr 2001, Herbert Xu wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 25, 2001 at 08:18:00AM -0400, Dale Scheetz wrote:
> >
> > The whole purpose of kernel-headers is to provide one, most stable, kernel
> > interface for the distro to build against. The idea was that, by choosing
> > the kernel to compile against you have the best chance of things working
> > correctly on other kernels.
>
> That is the raison d'etre for kernel-headers. However, the new per-image
> kernel-headers exist solely for the benefit of module builders.
Then you break things for no good reason. These "module builders" you
speak of should be using the same headers as glibc.
>
> > Creating a kernel-header for "each flavour" completely ignores and
> > defeates the reason that kernel-headers exist!
>
> Huh? There is still a kernel-headers package for the glibc maintainer to
> use. In fact, it's exactly the same as before.
And when some other library gets built with one of your other headers?
This is the sole reason for the existance of kernel-headers. Your
continued insistance that doing something else is good for someone else
ignores these reasons and is fundamentally a broken concept.
Strut all you want, but your just plain wrong.
Waiting is,
Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_- Author of "Dwarf's Guide to Debian GNU/Linux" _-_-_-_-_-_-
_- _-
_- aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769 _-
_- Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road _-
_- e-mail: dwarf@polaris.net Tallahassee, FL 32308 _-
_- _-
_-_-_-_-_- Released under the GNU Free Documentation License _-_-_-_-
available at: http://www.polaris.net/~dwarf/
Reply to: