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

Re: PW#5-16: Use of /usr/src



Hi,
>>"Ian" == Ian Jackson <ian@chiark.greenend.org.uk> writes:

Ian> Manoj Srivastava writes ("Re: PW#5-16: Use of /usr/src"): ...
>> Umm, no. The kernel-* package maintainers use kernel-package, which
>> produces (and has produced, in the past) the packages
>> kernel-{headers,source,doc,image}-<version>. There is no
>> interaction required between the two sets of maintainers (libc-dev
>> and kernel-*)

Ian> Why can't the kernel-package scripts arrange to create
Ian> libc-headers_ $version instead of
Ian> kernel-headers-$version_$version ?

	So, every time we build a kernel-* set of packages, it also
 creates a libc-headers package, whether or not the current
 libc depends on it? I would like to see kernel-* packages updated
 rather more oftne than the libc packages.

	

Ian> ...
>> But that is duplication of a package; it shall exists as
kernel-headers-> version> and libc-kernel-headers, the former since it
>> is automatically produced for all kernel-* packages (offcial or
>> unofficial packages); it is produced since people still use it.

Ian> Why can't we remove it in favour of the libc-headers package ?

	I fail to see an advantage compelling enough to warrant
 this. The packages are identical. We shall not reduce the
 number of packages, we do not create fewer dependencies.

>> I have, at the moment, 2 different kernel-header packages from two
>> different kernel versions. I use them for experimental modules that
>> I build. That is reason enough for kernel-headers-2.0.34.

Ian> Very few people need to do this; those that do can just install
Ian> the relevant kernel source trees by hand.

	There is a major difference between the size of a kernel
 source tree and a kernel headers tree. I am still not convinced about
 the merits of the proposed change.

	manoj

-- 
 "Note and initial": Let's spread the responsibility of this. Kelvin
 Throop III, "The Management Dictionary"
Manoj Srivastava  <srivasta@acm.org> <http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/>
Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05  CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E


--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org


Reply to: