substitution of linux version in LFS-6.0

Andrei A. Voropaev av at simcon-mt.com
Thu Dec 23 07:09:17 PST 2004


On Thu, Dec 23, 2004 at 03:53:56PM +0100, charlie wrote:
> Don Shuff a écrit :
> >On Thu, 23 Dec 2004 12:51:46 +0100
> >charlie <charlie.cllin at free.fr> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>J. Greenlees a écrit :
> >>
> >>>charlie wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>Hi everyone,
> >>>>
> >>>>Has anybody tried using linux 2.6.9 in LFS 6.0 rather than 2.8.6.1 
> >>>>during the installation. Is it considered safe and stable?
> >>>>
> >>>>Thank you
> >>>>CH COLLIN
> >>>
> >>>building 2.6.9?
> >>>or running on 2.6.9?
> >>
> >>no, building it, i mean replacing package linux-2.6.8.1 with 
> >>linux-2.6.9, that's it. I guess there's no roblem as 2.6.9 is newer but 
> >>still in the same version.
> >>
> >
> >
> >Am I correct in assuming that if you chose to "build" LFS 6 with kernel 
> >2.6.9 that you also have to use the linux-libc-headers-2.6.9.0 as well for 
> >sections 5.6.1 and  6.9.1 in the book.?
> >
> >
> 
> This is what i wonder, indeed. Is there a linux-libc-headers-2.6.9.0 
> package somewhere?
> In fact, my question is:
> i need LFS-6.0 with running kernel 2.6.9.
> How should i modify instructions in the book to get this?
> Can i simply follow step by step lfs book and replace linux-2.6.8.1 with 
> linux-2.6.9?

I've tried once to get raw headers from 2.6.9 and build glibc with them.
It worked. But then couple packages refused to build because 2.6.9
kernel headers are very different from 2.6.8.1 headers. So I had to
recompile my glibc with 2.6.8.1 headers and after that install 2.6.9
kernel. That worked without problem.

Andrei



More information about the lfs-support mailing list