On Wed, 12 Nov 2003, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote: > On Thu, Nov 13, 2003 at 05:05:26AM +0200, Martin-�ric Racine wrote: > > Given how libc6-dev has now become dependant upon > > linux-kernel-headers (why the hell wasn't libc6-dev designed to > > accomodate an existing and reliable kernel-headers-2.4.xx to fulfill > > this dependency? ARGH!), I very much have to consider this an > > important bug. > > Kindly read any of the hundred explanations of this decision in the > -glibc or -devel archives before ranting about it.
Been there, done that, still vehemently oppose to making libc6-dev depend upon the headers of a largely experimental and unproven kernel, namely 2.6-pre9. libc6-dev must depend upon a _proven_, _stable_and _trustable_ kernel branch; 2.6 is not one of those, while 2.4 definitely is. -- Martin-�ric Racine, ICT Consultant http://www.pp.fishpool.fi/~q-funk/
