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

Re: kernel headers

> Manoj Srivastava <srivasta@pilgrim.umass.edu> 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).
> Greetings
> Bernd

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.
david@ods.com                      1101 E. Arapaho Road
(214) 234-6400                     Richardson, TX  75081

Reply to: