Re: build depends on kernel-headers
>>"Sam" == Sam Hartman <hartmans@MIT.EDU> writes:
>>>>> "Manoj" == Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> writes:
>>>> "Aaron" == Aaron Lehmann <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
Aaron> So you're saying it's better to hardcode syscall numbers
Aaron> and stuff than using the kernel headers? Suuuure...
Manoj> We already have a process for packages that actually
Manoj> do need kernel headers, and are thus dependent on
Manoj> particular kernel versions.
Sam> We do? please explain what it is.
We call these packages kernel modules; and we have a process
by which you inform make where the relevant kernel headers are to be
found. make-kpkg automates that somewhat (and make-kpkg can be used
for packages that are not kernel-modules, you know).
A modification of this process would be possible; but I
reietrate that any package that can not deal with the headers in
/usr/include/linux is very closely dependent on kernel structures,
and would need to ensure that the kernel-version running has the
non-public API that it depends on.
Sam> Herbert produces kernel headers packages for all flavors of
Sam> kernels he produces. I do not believe the other arches do this.
This is not relevant.
Out of curiosity, apart from linux/autoconf.h; what is the
difference between the header packages on i386?
"Nuclear war would really set back cable." Ted Turner
Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024R/C7261095 print CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C