Sorry for the delay, I overlooked the last 2 replies because I was no longer in to: or cc: :(
On 03/28/2011 02:42 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: > On Fri, 2011-03-25 at 17:02 +0100, Michael Jones wrote: >> On 03/25/2011 03:55 PM, Richard Purdie wrote: >>> On Fri, 2011-03-25 at 15:14 +0100, Michael Jones wrote: >>> Ok, so you only really have the options of: >>> >>> a) Use a specific patched kernel for linux-libc-headers which has these >>> headers in it (see below for why this is ugly) >>> b) Install some extra headers in "libc-headers-extras" type recipe >>> c) Ship default versions of the headers with your userspace and use >>> those if shared versions don't exist. This assumes the API is stable and >>> on its way to mainline. >>> >>> I don't think this is as common a requirement as you think as most >>> people get this kind of thing merged into the mainline kernel to try and >>> reduce this kind of problem. >> >> To clarify, it's not that I have a custom patched kernel I need to use. >> I am following V4L2 development, so I am using a new kernel from those >> developers. V4L2 changes do of course move upstream. > > Ok, sorry, I was lacking context here. > >>> The ugliness is where you have two different arm boards you want to >>> build, with a common optimisation/toolchain and each wants to redirect >>> linux-libc-headers to its own "special" version. The question is then, >>> why aren't the "special" bits in mainline. >> >> OK, so here's what I'm realizing, please correct me if I'm wrong: >> What I did unconventionally (ie. wrong) was to use a kernel version >> newer than my linux-libc-headers were. I should create a new >> linux-libc-headers recipe, as I had done with the kernel recipe, and >> build glibc and linux-libc-headers using my 2.6.38 kernel. > > We should *always* be using linux-libc-headers >= to the kernel version > being used. Isn't it the other way around? Steffen Sledz had the opposite problem as me in Feb (http://www.mail-archive.com/openembedded-devel%40lists.openembedded.org/msg16022.html) because he's using a kernel older than the linux-libc-headers. He quotes the kernel doc: "This means that a program built against a C library using older kernel headers should run on a newer kernel" > >> I only stumbled upon this because the gstreamer-ti recipes were pointing >> at internal kernel headers, but because these are user-space apps, they >> should actually be using the linux-libc-headers. Right? > > Ideally, yes. I know under some circumstances, they might want to poke > into internal kernel headers but that is really a design issue that > needs fixing. > > Cheers, > > Richard > -Michael MATRIX VISION GmbH, Talstrasse 16, DE-71570 Oppenweiler Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 271090 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Gerhard Thullner, Werner Armingeon, Uwe Furtner _______________________________________________ Openembedded-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-devel
