Re: [gentoo-user] linux-headers vs gentoo-sources

[Statux]

The old way of doing things was to make the following two symlinks:

/usr/include/linux -> /usr/src/linux/include/linux
/usr/include/asm   -> /usr/src/linux/include/asm

Then the second would be linked to the correct set of asm headers for
your architecture, etc, inside the linux kernel source tree.

Somewhere along the lines, the symlinking idea became deprecated in
favor of using a hard set of header files. I forget why this came to be
but I agree that at some point, a newer kernel must render some portion
of an old set of headers outdated. I think the linux-headers package is
intended to be kept as up to date as possible to avoid interface
changes/incompatibilities. Why it's not kept even and why the
redundancy? Good questions.

I would figure that if you wanted to manually maintain a hard set of
headers and keep them installed in the correct places, you're free to do
so but the linux-headers package has been properly maintained from my
experience.

My $0.02.

On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 19:53 -0500, David Relson wrote:
> Today when I ran "emerge -au world" I was surprised to see
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> [ebuild     U ] sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.17-r2 [2.6.17-r1]
>
> because I'm presently running a 2.6.19-gentoo-r2 kernel (built from
> gentoo-sources-2.6.19-r1 using genkernel).
>
> When I run "emerge -C linux-headers" it warns me that
>
> !!! 'sys-kernel/linux-headers' is part of your system profile.
> !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system.
>
> Common sense tells me that anything 2.6.19 renders all things
> obsolete that relate to 2.6.17.  Am I right?
>
> Also, where is it recorded that linux-headers 2.6.17-r2 is important?
> I suspect I ought to delete that info as well.
>
> Thanks.
>
> David

-- 
Statux <statux@×××××××××.net>