Re: kernel headers
> Manoj Srivastava <email@example.com> writes:
> > The headers were included in libc5-dev after a rash of very
> > buggy alpha kernel releases (1.3.7* or something like that) that
> > proceeded to break compilations, etc. Kernel versions are changed
> > far more rapidly than libc is, and there are higer chances that
> > people install a custom kernel than they install custom libc.
> I strongly ask the ppl to think about this. This is a MAJOR difference from
> debian to the rest of the linux community. It even violates the
> recommedations from Linus himself (in the Kernels readme). Broken Headers
> due to instable Kernelinstalls are realy not a concern we should have. The
> System will just run fine, and those who install a new kernel and then
> compile a program are experienced enough to know how to get new version of
> the kernel if it wont work.
> I mean every single compiler run in the linux community is done with the
> actual kernelsources, why should we change this and act like we dont belong
> to linux?
> Programs which needs the linux/ and asm/ include-files have a reason to use
> them. A lot of programs compile dependingly of the kernelsource (for example
> the net-tools).
This has already been debated enough. Debian will continue to include
known-working kernel headers with libc unless and until that
arrangement proves to be unworkable. As I have time, I will continue
to encourage H.J. Lu and other Linux distributors to do the same.
David Engel Optical Data Systems, Inc.
firstname.lastname@example.org 1101 E. Arapaho Road
(214) 234-6400 Richardson, TX 75081