begin  quote
On Sun, 03 Aug 2003 22:39:25 +0200
Martin Gramatke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A not so good evening.


> This does not really enlighten me.
Frankly I'm not sure its even within my power to enlighten you.  


>  What does 'were present' mean? 
it means, present. As in being located in /usr/include/linux at the time
of the time of  "emerge  glibc" .

> I assume you mean 'were used'. 
Are used.  glibc doesn't care about what the linux headers are. Things
that depend on glibc however, do at build-time. This is why you should
have consistency between the OS headers (linux in this case) and the
glibc.



> But then I still don't know which  one  these are. A self-contained
> kernel-header ebuild, possibly of a fixed version dependend on the
> glibc ebuild version?

Would you ever to read the previous parts the question is about the
package called "linux-headers" of which would give the impression it is
infact headers from the linux kernel existing in a self contained
ebuild.


>  Or is it a collection  of headers inside the  glibc ebuild itself? 
No.

> Or are these the headers that /usr/src/linux  links to?
Where did /usr/src/linux come into the discussion?   the linux-headers
have -NOTHING- to do with the usr/src/linux files. They are far to
moving a target for care here.



> In the first case, we should better rebuild the glibc after the recent
> kernel header update, isn't it? Except it was a very minor update.

Were you ever to read a ChangeLog you would realize that the actual data
contained inside the linux-headers did not at any point change, the
build was updated to provide a virtual/os-headers Which is necessary for
future versatility in the operating system.



//Spider

-- 
begin  .signature
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end

Attachment: pgp00000.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to