On Sat, Jan 10, 2004 at 09:16:23PM -0700, s. keeling said > Could someone please 'splain to me what goes with what here? I've > updated to 3.0r2. The plan so far is: > > (i) Install kernel-image-2.4.18-686 > (ii) Go for updated kernel sources and re-build. > > I see there's kernel-source-2.4.18 and: > > kernel-headers-2.4.18 - Header files related to Linux kernel version 2.4.18 > kernel-headers-2.4.18-686 - Linux kernel headers 2.4.18 on PPro/Celeron/PII/PIII/PIV > kernel-headers-2.4.18-1-686 - Linux kernel headers 2.4.18 on PPro/Celeron/PII/PIII/PIV > kernel-headers-2.4.18-bf2.4 - Headers for Linux kernel version 2.4.18 (bf variant) on 386 > > Will all of those work with kernel-source-2.4.18? kernel-headers-2.4.18-686 > Which one _should_ > I be using (PIII laptop workstation box; not server)? Eh? The kernel-headers packages only matter while you're building modules. > What's "bf > variant" and why should I care? One of the google pages I looked at > said, "The bf2.4 kernel is limited by the desire to keep it on > floppies during installation." The bf2.4 kernel variety is stripped down and only includes a *selection* of available kernel modules. This is so the total is small enough to fit on a single floppy disk for the installer. The kernel-image-2.4.18-<cpu> packages, on the other hand, include ALL the available modules. > I can't imagine why I would want to do > that. If it doesn't boot, I'll just slap a bootable CD in, boot from > that, and fix whatever's broken. I don't think I need to care about > bf*, or am I missing something? Right. > PS Just a suggestion, but it might help, in the future, if those > descriptions above were tightened up a bit. Both > kernel-headers-2.4.18-686 and kernel-headers-2.4.18-1-686 are > described the same. Because they are the same, sorta. The -1- package is newer and is related to fixing a serious security flaw in the original 2.4.18 packages, IIRC. > PPS For extra marks :-), why the proliferation of source & header > packages? I thought this kind of thing was supposed to be > controlled by #ifdef & friends. I can understand having > thirteen pre-built kernel-image packages, but why sixteen > kernel-headers-2.4.18? Because you need one for each kernel-image package. When you build a kernel, you end up with some modules, a kernel image and some configured header files (most importantly, modversions.h, which you need to build modules for the kernel). The kernel-image packages contain the kernel image itself, and all the modules you built along with it. The kernel-headers bit contains all the configured header files that you would need to build *other* modules for that kernel. -- Rob Weir <rweir@ertius.org> | mlspam@ertius.org | Do I look like I want a CC? Words of the day: anarchy benelux underground CIA AIEWS Consul
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature