First of all, linux-kernel-headers has been replaced by linux-libc-dev.
Ok. But linux-kernel-headers is still a virtual package. Isn't it?
But either way, the answer is the same: those packages install them in
/usr/include, which is unpacked and accessible to any program being
compiled
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 09:08:21AM +, Cyril Jaquier wrote:
First of all, linux-kernel-headers has been replaced by linux-libc-dev.
Ok. But linux-kernel-headers is still a virtual package. Isn't it?
no, it doesn't exists anymore. ll-dev provides it to allow upgrades,
but no-one should
Hi all,
I'm new to Debian so sorry for this newbie question ;)
Why do not the linux-source-2.6.* packages provide linux-kernel-headers?
Regards,
Cyril Jaquier
P.S. Please, do not forget to CC me because I am not subscribed to the list.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED
On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 12:44:17AM +0100, Cyril Jaquier wrote:
Why do not the linux-source-2.6.* packages provide linux-kernel-headers?
First of all, linux-kernel-headers has been replaced by linux-libc-dev.
But either way, the answer is the same: those packages install them in
/usr/include
On Saturday 14 July 2007 17:20:42 pm Daniel Schepler wrote:
I intend to do a mass bug filing soon on packages that FTBFS because they
have a versioned Build-Depends on linux-kernel-headers, which has been
removed from sid. (Unversioned Build-Depends are fine for now, since
linux-libc-dev
I intend to do a mass bug filing soon on packages that FTBFS because they have
a versioned Build-Depends on linux-kernel-headers, which has been removed
from sid. (Unversioned Build-Depends are fine for now, since linux-libc-dev
Provides it.) According to a quick search through the index
On Sat, Jul 14, 2007, Daniel Schepler wrote:
gnome-vfs2
Fixed in SVN; please don't file this one; thanks!
--
Loïc Minier
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 11 Feb 2007 22:02:52 -0500
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.6.18-7
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc@lists.debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 05:14:08 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.18-6
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 16:34:02 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.18-4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc@lists.debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 15:12:30 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.18-5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc@lists.debian.org
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 8 Oct 2006 04:40:20 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.18-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 7 Oct 2006 08:59:27 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.18-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
I am trying to prepare packages for the new MaxDB release 7.5.00.38 and
am having problems with a new piece of code in there.
The code in question looks like this and is known to work on Suse SLES9:
...
# include asm/timex.h
are user-space applications not supposed to include any
On 9/22/06, Martin Kittel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So this brings me back to me original problem: are user-space
applications allowed/supposed to use these headers? And if so, how are
they to be used if the headers rely on __KERNEL__ to be defined?
My understanding was that userspace should
Am Freitag 22 September 2006 19:54 schrieb Martin Kittel:
So this brings me back to me original problem: are user-space
applications allowed/supposed to use these headers? And if so, how are
they to be used if the headers rely on __KERNEL__ to be defined?
Did you try to comment out those
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2006 12:02:47 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.18-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc@lists.debian.org
/usr/include/linux/seqlock.h:76: error: expected '=', ',', ';\
', 'asm' or '__attribute__' before 'unsigned'
/usr/include/linux/seqlock.h:91: error: expected '=', ',', ';\
', 'asm' or '__attribute__' before 'int'
This comes from the __always_inline that is not defined. To define it,
# include asm/types.h
# include asm/timex.h
# define HAS_GET_CYCLES
#endif
...
However when I try to compile this with linux-kernel-headers
(2.6.17.10-3) on my amd64 box I only get a host of error messages
starting like this:
RTESys_MicroTime.c fast
In file included from /usr/include/asm
Am Donnerstag 21 September 2006 20:09 schrieb Martin Kittel:
In file included from /usr/include/asm-x86_64/vsyscall.h:4,
from /usr/include/asm/vsyscall.h:8,
from /usr/include/asm-x86_64/timex.h:11,
from /usr/include/asm/timex.h:8,
On Sep 21, Martin Kittel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have no experience in this area, so I am just wondering: are
user-space applications not supposed to include any headers below
/usr/include/asm
Yes. The application is buggy.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 11:57:06 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.17.10-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: medium
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 4 Sep 2006 19:55:07 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.17.10-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2006 22:43:10 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.17.10-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2006 00:30:26 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.17.8-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: high
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 5 Aug 2006 18:23:58 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.17.7-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 23 Jul 2006 01:30:26 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.17.6-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 3 Jul 2006 16:22:38 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.17.3-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 21 Jun 2006 11:47:18 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.17.1-999exp1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2006 20:34:44 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.17.1-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2006 18:09:04 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.16.20-6
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 02:26:00 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.16.20-4
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 11 Jun 2006 12:23:06 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.16.20-5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 15:13:52 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.16.20-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 10 Jun 2006 18:26:40 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.16.20-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 9 Jun 2006 23:11:52 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source sparc
Version: 2.6.16.20-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 6 Mar 2006 02:29:10 +0100
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: i386 source
Version: 2.6.13+0rc3-2.1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Steinar H. Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2005 15:42:01 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.6.13+0rc3-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 07 Aug 2005 12:57:42 +0200
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.6.13+0rc3-1.1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers debian-glibc
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Thu, 16 Jun 2005 23:40:06 +0900
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: arm hppa i386 ia64 m68k mips mipsel powerpc s390 source sparc
Version: 2.6.12.0-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 28 May 2005 00:00:34 +0900
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: i386 powerpc source sparc
Version: 2.6.12+0rc6-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GOTO Masanori [EMAIL
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 3 May 2005 11:55:21 +0900
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.6.12+0rc5-1
Distribution: experimental
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GOTO Masanori [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 6 Jun 2004 05:35:11 +0900
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-17
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GOTO Masanori [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2004 09:50:38 -0500
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-15
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2004 13:14:48 -0500
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-14
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2004 18:06:31 -0500
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-13
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 13:39:22 -0500
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-12
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Tue, 30 Dec 2003 14:40:28 -0500
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-11
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 13 Dec 2003 16:13:20 -0500
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-10
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers [EMAIL PROTECTED
Graham Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 09:37:16PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:45:32AM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 07:55:03PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
What not rename linux-kernel-headers to simple
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:45:24PM -0600, Graham Wilson wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 09:37:16PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:45:32AM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 07:55:03PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
What not rename linux-kernel
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 02:18:16PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 07:55:03PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
What not rename linux-kernel-headers to simple system-headers-linux?
This will prevent confused users (or: lazy to read the description users)
from asking
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sun, 9 Nov 2003 00:21:32 +
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-9
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Changed-By: Philip
#include hallo.h
* GOTO Masanori [Fri, Nov 07 2003, 01:43:15PM]:
Sorry, users will still ask. They always ask. Users still think that
updating /usr/include/linux to point to /usr/src/linux/include/linux is the
right thing to do.
And then, which package does provide /usr/src/linux
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 07:55:03PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
What not rename linux-kernel-headers to simple system-headers-linux?
This will prevent confused users (or: lazy to read the description users)
from asking this again and again.
system-headers-linux is a bit vague and without
Hi,
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:45:32AM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 07:55:03PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
What not rename linux-kernel-headers to simple system-headers-linux?
This will prevent confused users (or: lazy to read the description users)
from
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 01:14:31PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 05-Nov-03, 19:14 (CST), Jonathan Dowland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm in two minds whether or not to ask this, but I've been wondering
about the naming scheme for linux packages - kernel-*. Why not
linux-kernel-* or
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:45:32AM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 07:55:03PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
What not rename linux-kernel-headers to simple system-headers-linux?
This will prevent confused users (or: lazy to read the description users)
from asking
On Fri, 7 Nov 2003, GOTO Masanori wrote:
And then, which package does provide /usr/src/linux directory?
none should.
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 09:37:16PM +0100, Otto Wyss wrote:
On Fri, Nov 07, 2003 at 10:45:32AM +, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 07:55:03PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
What not rename linux-kernel-headers to simple system-headers-linux?
This will prevent
also sprach Greg Folkert [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2003.11.06.0243 +0100]:
about the naming scheme for linux packages - kernel-*. Why not
linux-kernel-* or linux-* ? If alternative kernels in debian become
more popular, is there a potential for confusion in the future?
[...]
Martin Kraaft?
Scripsit Zenaan Harkness [EMAIL PROTECTED]
When I search for packages, I think I'd prefer (assuming I want
to see all kernel- type packages), I'd prefer kernel-linux-*,
kernel-hurd-*, kernel-freebsd-*, etc.
Instead of trying to cram that into package names, would it not be
more appropriate
#include hallo.h
* Otto Wyss [Sun, Nov 02 2003, 10:21:14AM]:
Since when does the package libc6-dev depend on linux-kernel-headers? Is
this dependes really necessary?
without further checks of feasibility
What not rename linux-kernel-headers to simple system-headers-linux?
This will prevent
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 07:55:03PM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
#include hallo.h
* Otto Wyss [Sun, Nov 02 2003, 10:21:14AM]:
Since when does the package libc6-dev depend on linux-kernel-headers? Is
this dependes really necessary?
without further checks of feasibility
What not rename
On Thu, 6 Nov 2003, Eduard Bloch wrote:
#include hallo.h
* Otto Wyss [Sun, Nov 02 2003, 10:21:14AM]:
Since when does the package libc6-dev depend on linux-kernel-headers? Is
this dependes really necessary?
without further checks of feasibility
What not rename linux-kernel-headers
On 05-Nov-03, 19:14 (CST), Jonathan Dowland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm in two minds whether or not to ask this, but I've been wondering
about the naming scheme for linux packages - kernel-*. Why not
linux-kernel-* or linux-* ? If alternative kernels in debian become
more popular, is there a
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 01:14:31PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 05-Nov-03, 19:14 (CST), Jonathan Dowland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm in two minds whether or not to ask this, but I've been wondering
about the naming scheme for linux packages - kernel-*. Why not
linux-kernel-* or
On 06-Nov-03, 13:47 (CST), Keegan Quinn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 01:14:31PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
Surely these won't all show up in the same Packages file...if you're
running GNU/KFreeBSD, it will be a FreeBSD kernel, right? Why would the
Linux and Hurd
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 01:14:31PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 05-Nov-03, 19:14 (CST), Jonathan Dowland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm in two minds whether or not to ask this, but I've been wondering
about the naming scheme for linux packages - kernel-*. Why not
linux-kernel-* or
On Thu, Nov 06, 2003 at 01:14:31PM -0600, Steve Greenland wrote:
On 05-Nov-03, 19:14 (CST), Jonathan Dowland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm in two minds whether or not to ask this, but I've been wondering
about the naming scheme for linux packages - kernel-*. Why not
linux-kernel-* or
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 08:43:52PM -0500, Greg Folkert wrote:
On Wed, 2003-11-05 at 20:14, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
I'm in two minds whether or not to ask this, but I've been wondering
about the naming scheme for linux packages - kernel-*. Why not
linux-kernel-* or linux-* ? If alternative
At Thu, 6 Nov 2003 13:20:36 -0600 (CST),
Adam Heath wrote:
Sorry, users will still ask. They always ask. Users still think that
updating /usr/include/linux to point to /usr/src/linux/include/linux is the
right thing to do.
And then, which package does provide /usr/src/linux directory?
not need to
match the kernel version - but calling the package
'linux-kernel-headers' gives a strong association between itself and the
linux kernel.
In what situation would the linux-kernel-headers package be needed
seperate from libc?
--
Jon Dowland
http://jon.dowland.name/
rarely include them. The headers do not need to
match the kernel version - but calling the package
'linux-kernel-headers' gives a strong association between itself and the
linux kernel.
[...]
Ok, I get your point. RedHat 7.3 uses glibc-kernheaders as name for
this package.
cu
Jonathan Dowland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In what situation would the linux-kernel-headers package be needed
seperate from libc?
Ths issue is not whether it is needed separately from libc-dev, the
issue is that it comes from a different upstream source and thus is
best handled in a separate
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 10:37:24PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
Jonathan Dowland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In what situation would the linux-kernel-headers package be needed
seperate from libc?
Ths issue is not whether it is needed separately from libc-dev, the
issue is that it comes from
. It has
been mentioned that these headers are mostly 'private' to libc, that is,
applications should rarely include them. The headers do not need to
match the kernel version - but calling the package
'linux-kernel-headers' gives a strong association between itself and the
linux kernel
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 01:20:49PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
It does not need to. Feel free to propose a patch to document this
more clearly (I don't really want to rename it again...)
Add something like this to the description:
These headers are not used to compile kernel modules,
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 05:23:30PM -0500, Andrew Pimlott wrote:
On Mon, Nov 03, 2003 at 01:20:49PM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
It does not need to. Feel free to propose a patch to document this
more clearly (I don't really want to rename it again...)
Add something like this to the
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 11:13:28AM -0600, Ryan Underwood wrote:
Before that realization, it seemed like the type of random cruft that
sometimes gets pulled in on dist-upgrade; a name change would help
alleviate that initial perception, IMO. Why not libc6-linux-headers?
I'm in two minds
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 11:21:11AM -0500, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 10:37:24PM +1100, Herbert Xu wrote:
Jonathan Dowland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In what situation would the linux-kernel-headers package be needed
seperate from libc?
Ths issue is not whether
On Wed, 2003-11-05 at 20:14, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
On Wed, Nov 05, 2003 at 11:13:28AM -0600, Ryan Underwood wrote:
Before that realization, it seemed like the type of random cruft that
sometimes gets pulled in on dist-upgrade; a name change would help
alleviate that initial perception,
On Thu, 2003-11-06 at 12:14, Jonathan Dowland wrote:
I'm in two minds whether or not to ask this, but I've been wondering
about the naming scheme for linux packages - kernel-*. Why not
linux-kernel-* or linux-* ? If alternative kernels in debian become
more popular, is there a potential for
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 09:32:07 -0500
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-8
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Wed, 5 Nov 2003 00:36:05 -0500
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-7
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers [EMAIL PROTECTED
to rename it again...)
Not normally, but installing 2.5/2.6 based header files can break
attempts to build 2.4 modules --- openafs-modules-source broke as a
direct result of installing linux-kernel-headers 2.5.99-test7-bk-6.
- Ted
to propose a patch to document this
more clearly (I don't really want to rename it again...)
Not normally, but installing 2.5/2.6 based header files can break
attempts to build 2.4 modules --- openafs-modules-source broke as a
direct result of installing linux-kernel-headers 2.5.99-test7-bk-6
-headers? Is
this dependes really necessary?
There have always been some kernel headers in libc6-dev, they've just
been split out into a separate package now. Several of these headers
are referenced by headers provided by glibc which would break those
headers if linux-kernel-headers
-kernel-headers is not installed.
I'd prefer the old way.
And can you give a substantive reason? Without one your message makes
no sense.
I didn't give a reason because it wouldn't change anything. I always
download the kernel sources myself and build my kernel from scratch. I
therefore don't
break those headers if linux-kernel-headers is not
installed.
I'd prefer the old way.
And can you give a substantive reason? Without one your message
makes no sense.
I didn't give a reason because it wouldn't change anything. I always
download the kernel sources myself and build my kernel
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Sat, 1 Nov 2003 17:34:44 -0500
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-6
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 27 Oct 2003 11:12:06 -0500
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-5
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: GNU Libc Maintainers [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 12:53:48 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-1
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Daniel Jacobowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2003 18:18:47 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-3
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Daniel Jacobowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Format: 1.7
Date: Mon, 20 Oct 2003 21:53:52 -0400
Source: linux-kernel-headers
Binary: linux-kernel-headers
Architecture: source i386
Version: 2.5.999-test7-bk-2
Distribution: unstable
Urgency: low
Maintainer: Daniel Jacobowitz [EMAIL PROTECTED
95 matches
Mail list logo
