ln -s linux.x.x.x linux or not?
tcblack at wireless111.net
Mon Apr 19 17:15:14 PDT 2004
Allard Welter wrote:
> On Monday 19 April 2004 23:16, Tom Black wrote:
>>Miguel Bazdresch wrote:
>>>* Tom Black <tcblack at wireless111.net> [2004-04-19 17:34]:
>>>>I ultimately unpacked the bz2 linux kernal into /usr/src/linux-2.4.22
>>>>ln -s linux-2.4.22 linux
>>>>Please somebody tell me if that was the worst or best (or indifferent?)
>>>>thing I could have done.
>>>The problem is that there are (allegedly) packages that insist on
>>>looking for headers in /usr/src/linux. Some of those packages are broken
>>>and really should be using the kernel headers against which glibc was
>>This Rumor is what caused me to go ahead and create the Symlink. But
>>the more I see it as a rumor the more I wonder if it's worth any
>>potential trouble. So I guess that needs to be the question.
>>I realize there is a "potential" benefit to the link (Alleged broken
>>packages) what are the "potential" problems?
>>If one outweighs the other clearly enough I'll kill it or keep it.
> My philosophy would go as such. You'll find out if you need it because some
> package will complain, until then you don't need it. Potential problems? I
> speak for myself here, I'm guaranteed to forget to relink it when upgrading
> the kernel. <SNIP>
Ahh, I forgot to account for my own (similar) human nature. I shall
delete the link. Thanks for that thought Allard.
Total Linux Newbie (But trying to cure it)
More information about the lfs-support