Hi Andy & Bruce, Many thanks for your prompt, clear and helpful answers.
Andy: > You should leave the kernel headers in /usr/include > as they were when you installed glibc. Bruce: > The kernel varies, but you build glibc against one specific kernel. > The programs that are built later need to be consistent with that > glibc/kernel header combination. > Americans and British are separated by a common language. The clarity and power of the subject Warning speaks volumes as to what can result from a close British-American co-operation. ------------------------------------------------------------------ At the very least, your answers have helped me sharpen my big question which, after all, is based on this actual, immovable fact: 'udev-181' expects to find in '/usr/include/linux' a file, 'input.h', which contains the definition of a so called BTN_TRIGGER_HAPPY. Good, OK. I understand. Another secondary fact (which is most likely on me), my current '/usr/include/linux/input.h' does NOT contain it. Maybe because file too old, a mistake/omission in 6.7, etc., etc. Bad, Not-OK. ------ Now I can crystallize my "header" question a lot more. We know an 'udev-xxx' (say, 'udev-173') did not need BTN_TRIGGER_HAPPY, while a later udev (say, 'udev-181') aware of a _newer_ 'input.h' file floating around, which does contain BTN_TRIGGER_HAPPY, expected the user (i.e., me) to have this file in '/usr/include/...'. Based on that, here's (finally) the finalized question: IF I'm up to date with the LFS book, and am at the latest Glibc, v2.14.1 (issued 07-Oct-2011, FWIW) no matter what kernel version was at the time (say, 3.0.9) - assuming I compiled Glibc-2.14.1 in Nov. 2011 - the "sanitized" headers installed as per Book 6.7 provide a guaranty for me that they contain the "correct" 'input.h' for as long as I stay with Glibc-2.14.1, no matter what the udev version du jour (181++) might be. Or put another way around, udev-173++ developers rely on and expect me to have the Nov. 2011 headers (sanitised:) and as for me, I'll be fine for any future udev release, as long as the Glibc stays at 2.14.1. Is that so? BTW, I didn't know that developers (udev and otherwise) are continuously careful to stay within the latest Glibc-thenKernel confines. Thanks, -- Alex PS - I don't have any idea when BTN_TRIGGER_HAPPY made its way into 'input.h'. Too bad. It'd've been interesting. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
