kernel configuration and installation
ken at linuxfromscratch.org
Thu Oct 30 12:14:11 PDT 2008
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 01:11:35PM +0000, Richard Melville wrote:
> > Yes, I think you've missed the important thing ;) The kernel
> > headers are what glibc was compiled against, and they should not be
> > changed unless you upgrade glibc [ and before anyone misconstrues
> > that, we *don't* support upgrading glibc - when the time comes,
> > build a new system ].
> Hi Ken
> My reading of Rob's post was that he was wondering why distros like
> Ubuntu could frequently update kernel headers when we are told not to.
> If this was not his question then I wouldn't mind some advise on this issue.
I don't follow ubuntu, so I can't be certain why they update
headers. Maybe it's when they update glibc.
> The problem occurs when some packages insist on parsing
> /usr/include/linux. I had a problem recently when installing VLC. I
> had enabled DCCP in my new kernel and I wanted to build VLC with the
> required support. I had already tested DCCP and it was working OK, but
> the VLC build failed complaining about missing headers. When I checked
> the source code it was looking in /usr/include/linux, which surely must
> be bad practice. I can't see why arbitrary packages should be poking
> around in the kernel headers. Clearly, as my glibc was built against
> much older kernel headers its search was unsuccessful.
> I was wondering what the solution is here? Should we install the new
> kernel headers into a separate sub-directory and change the source code
> to point to the new sub-directory rather than to /usr/include/linux, or
> would this just not work?
> I'd appreciate your, or anybody else's, view on the subject.
I've never looked at VLC. Looking at /usr/include/linux seems
a reasonable thing for a configure script to be doing. Which kernel
headers did you use when building glibc, and what is now reported to
be missing-and-required ?
das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce
More information about the lfs-support