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

Re: build depends on kernel-headers

>>"Sam" == Sam Hartman <hartmans@MIT.EDU> writes:

>>>>> "Manoj" == Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@debian.org> writes:
 >>>> "Aaron" == Aaron Lehmann <aaronl@vitelus.com> 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   <srivasta@debian.org>  <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

Reply to: