Confusing Linux headers?

Wit WitlessIdiot at triad.rr.com
Sun Feb 25 08:53:08 PST 2007


Dan Nicholson wrote:
> One of the CLFS developers wrote on lfs-dev that some users on IRC
> were confused about whether the Linux headers were the CLFS headers or
> not.
>
> http://linuxfromscratch.org/pipermail/lfs-dev/2007-February/058935.html
>
> The LFS editors are having a hard time seeing this perspective since
> we're all aware of the history there.
I'm also aware of the history, but having been away from *LFS for some 
time, thought I'd peek and see what was causing the confusion.

My conclusion is that folks are not reading carefully where it says "... 
from the kernel...".

Possibly <emphasis>... </emphasis> is all that is needed?

>  So, I'd like to ask if anyone
> has been confused about this relationship. If so, could you suggest
> some text that would clarify it? The pages are here:
>
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/chapter05/linux-headers.html
> http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/view/development/chapter06/linux-headers.html
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Dan
>   


As a last ditch attempt, adding another line that says something more 
clearly than "exposes ..." which I suspect many would not comprehend? 
Maybe "... to give application binaries a standard interface to various 
kernel-provided services (through glibc/gcc, etc.), the kernel package 
provides a few "headers" in the tarball that are extracted and saved 
during the LFS installation process."

I feel it is a weak proposal, but I tend to find all proposed solutions 
to compensate for failures to carefully read *and* comprehend are weak. 
I see no weakness in the text, as is.


MHO
--
Wit



More information about the lfs-support mailing list