Andrew Benton wrote:
Jeremy Herbison wrote:
Well, if you say so... I know it was in unstable at least, shortly after
kernel 2.6 was introduced.
Either way, can you see any technical reasons why that would not make
a good
stop-gap solution for inotify etc. support?
It was good enough for LFS-6
http://archive.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs-museum/6.0/LFS-BOOK-6.0-HTML/chapter05/kernel-headers.html
In chapter 6 glibc was configured --with-headers=/tools/glibc-kernheaders
Gnome-vfs checks for sys/inotify.h (which comes from glibc) and
linux/inotify.h (which comes from the kernel). If we do it the way
you're suggesting it would find sys/inotify.h but not linux/inotify.h so
it may work or it may not. I think it's worth a try at the very least.
Just to report back about this, it's working well for me. I think this
is worth serious consideration, to go back to the way we did it in
LFS-6.0. Build glibc against the raw 2.6.16 kernel headers and use the
linux-libc-headers-2.6.12.0 for userspace.
Andy
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
