Re: kernel headerts and libc6
On 13 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Ok, I give up. As Ian suggested, maybe we do need
> libc-kheaders package. The upstream version could be the same as the
> kernel version, and it shall be updated as libc6 development
> will. This way, there shall be less linkage with the kernel-*
> packages.
>
> I am tired of answering questions on -user.
Why is it that a good FAQ never seems to work?
>
> I can incorporate it inot kernel-package; it shall not be a
> target normally called, so people shall not suddenly start creating
> libc-kheaders packages.
>
> It shall just contain the kernel headers. Dale, please let me
> know if you want the headers dumped into a real /usr/include/linux
> directory, or what. I think we should make then real directories,
> just to prevent more uninformed questions.
>
I have no strong interest one way of the other. I guess that if you make
it a directory, then I don't need to deal with any symlinks in the libc6
package?
> It means more work for all involved, but hey.
It's what we're here for ;-)
>
> Should this go into slink? Or can it still go into hamm? Maybe
> this may cause less confusion if it does go in released hamm.
>
I think this is a bug fix and should go into frozen.
Waiting is,
Dwarf
--
_-_-_-_-_- Author of "The Debian Linux User's Guide" _-_-_-_-_-_-
aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (850) 656-9769
Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road
e-mail: dwarf@polaris.net Tallahassee, FL 32308
_-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_-
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-policy-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: