On Die, 2002-10-22 at 14:23, Dr Andrew C Aitchison wrote: > On 22 Oct 2002, Michel D�nzer wrote: > > > > That the new header is being picked up seems the only viable explanantion > > > for the reported symptom. How it got there is irrelevant. Perhaps > > > re-installing glibc from source re-syncs the headers, I don't know. Or, > > > possibly, this system simply does not implement the glibc/kernel version > > > skew some distributions are so prone to. > > > > I'm sure you mean the sane technical solution explained in > > http://uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0007.3/0587.html ? > > I'm tempted to think that the whole problem comes about because > the phrase "kernel headers" is used to cover both kernel headers and > glibc headers, which ought to be two distinct interfaces. > > Whenever I read why the kernel headers should be updated with the kernel, > but should match the version of glibc I see examples of programs which > appear to be linked against glibc, not against the kernel.
Yes, the point is that userspace apps normally only need and should only use the glibc headers. Only kernel modules normally need the actual kernel headers. If a userspace app really does need kernel headers but (understandably) doesn't want to deal with their volatile nature, it should have its own copy of what it needs, like we have programs/Xserver/hw/xfree86/fbdevhw/fbpriv.h . -- Earthling Michel D�nzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast _______________________________________________ Xpert mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://XFree86.Org/mailman/listinfo/xpert
