Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-headers ebuild version.

Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-headers ebuild version.

[Chris PeBenito]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1160 bytes --]

On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 15:20, Svyatogor wrote:
> AFAIK the version of headers and of kernel are supposed to be the same. But in 
> this case, I'll have vanilla-sources-2.4.21 and say my iptables will be build 
> against headers for 2.4.19.
> 
> My question is: are there any plans to bump up the version of the headers 
> package, or it is obsolete. In the later case, I guess, no package should 
> depend on virtual/os-headers any more, but rather on virtual/linux-sources 
> (or probably the *sources, shoudl provide os-headers).

The headers should be the same ones used to compile glibc.  i.e. the
headers should match the library object files.  Its been said many times
that /usr/include/{linux,asm} should not be symlinked to the kernel
sources.

-- 
Chris PeBenito
<pebenito@gentoo.org>
Developer, SELinux
Hardened Gentoo Linux
 
"Engineering does not require science. Science helps
a lot, but people built perfectly good brick walls
long before they knew why cement works."-Alan Cox

Public Key: http://pgp.mit.edu:11371/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xE6AF9243
Key fingerprint = B0E6 877A 883F A57A 8E6A  CB00 BC8E E42D E6AF 9243

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-headers ebuild version.

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1464 bytes --]

On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 20:03, Chris PeBenito wrote:
> On Fri, 2003-06-20 at 15:20, Svyatogor wrote:
> > AFAIK the version of headers and of kernel are supposed to be the same. But in 
> > this case, I'll have vanilla-sources-2.4.21 and say my iptables will be build 
> > against headers for 2.4.19.
> > 
> > My question is: are there any plans to bump up the version of the headers 
> > package, or it is obsolete. In the later case, I guess, no package should 
> > depend on virtual/os-headers any more, but rather on virtual/linux-sources 
> > (or probably the *sources, shoudl provide os-headers).
> 
> The headers should be the same ones used to compile glibc.  i.e. the
> headers should match the library object files.  Its been said many times
> that /usr/include/{linux,asm} should not be symlinked to the kernel
> sources.

I do not know if I 100% agree with this.  Something like iptables is
more like drivers ... you need to be spot on, or in close vicinity of
the running kernel with the headers you compile it against.

Anyhow, in general in Gentoo, if you compile something like iptable,
nvidia-kernel, alsa, etc, it use the kernel headers in /usr/src/linux,
as it is easier to manage (say you are running kernel from livecd,
but want to compile whatever for your kernel that you will be
booting ...).


Regards,

-- 

Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa



[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] linux-headers ebuild version.

[Svyatogor]

I have recently been installing gentoo on a new (well actually very old) box 
and I noticed the following strange thing. 
Some packages (e.g.: iptables, iputils, baselayout) are deperate to install 
the linux-headers, which is no suprise. However, the latest version of 
linux-headers package in 2.4.19, while the *sources are at 2.4.21. 

AFAIK the version of headers and of kernel are supposed to be the same. But in 
this case, I'll have vanilla-sources-2.4.21 and say my iptables will be build 
against headers for 2.4.19.

My question is: are there any plans to bump up the version of the headers 
package, or it is obsolete. In the later case, I guess, no package should 
depend on virtual/os-headers any more, but rather on virtual/linux-sources 
(or probably the *sources, shoudl provide os-headers).
-- 
Sergey Kuleshov <svyatogor@gentoo.org>
Let the Force be with us!


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-headers ebuild version.

[David Nielsen]

I had countless problems getting stuff to compile against 2.5 because of
2.4 headers being present in /usr/lib - this madness has to end, is
there no sane solution to this crap, basically we risk breaking
something at near random when we upgrade the kernel just because some
header changed and some program makes an assumption that is wrong like a
struct that has changed - right?

we need a sane way to work around this - I remember Martin Schlemmer 
once proposing a kernel API to make sure we always had a sane way of
working with the kernel without including kernel headers in userspace
which is the cause of many a problem.

- Lovechild

On Sat, 2003-06-21 at 00:40, Svyatogor wrote:
> On Friday 20 June 2003 19:25, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> >
> > Anyhow, in general in Gentoo, if you compile something like iptable,
> > nvidia-kernel, alsa, etc, it use the kernel headers in /usr/src/linux,
> > as it is easier to manage (say you are running kernel from livecd,
> > but want to compile whatever for your kernel that you will be
> > booting ...).
> Exactly, so it shouldn't be installing the headers in /usr/include/linux, 
> which is what linux-headers does.


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-headers ebuild version.

[Adam Trilling]

(first time poster, don't flame me please :) )

There has been some discussion of this on lkml recently, and also on
lfs-dev.  I unfortunately haven't been following either discussion as
closely as I should, but here's the gist of what I understand:

The longstanding belief is that the kernel headers in /usr/include should
be the ones that glibc was compiled against.  This makes sense, since
glibc is putting it's headers in /usr/include, and it keeps all of
/usr/include consistent with itself.

However, as the kernel changes, compiling glibc against different sets of
kernel headers results in different (inconsistent) glibcs.  This brings up
the need for a standard kernel API.  The bits I picked up from lkml and
lfs-dev were that the kernel guys wanted a "sanitized" set of headers that
would theoretically work with any glibc and any kernel, and there was some
vehement disagreement over exactly how to develop these "sanitized"
headers.

Part of the problem is broken packages.  Based on the idea of putting the
headers used for glibc in /usr/include, any package that needs kernel
headers in userspace should use /usr/include/linux, and drivers that
aren't included in the kernel should use the running kernel's headers
(/lib/modules/`uname -r`/build/include).

Now, what does this have to do with gentoo?  Well, first of all, I assume
those in charge will be paying attention to kernel and glibc development
to see what becomes of the header sanitization.  Second, maybe we can
force ebuilds to use the proper set of headers somehow?  Like maybe
setting a flag in the ebuild that temporarily symlinks
/usr/include/{linux,asm} to /lib/modules/`uname -r`/build/include?

adam

On Fri, 20 Jun 2003, David Nielsen wrote:

> I had countless problems getting stuff to compile against 2.5 because of
> 2.4 headers being present in /usr/lib - this madness has to end, is
> there no sane solution to this crap, basically we risk breaking
> something at near random when we upgrade the kernel just because some
> header changed and some program makes an assumption that is wrong like a
> struct that has changed - right?
>
> we need a sane way to work around this - I remember Martin Schlemmer
> once proposing a kernel API to make sure we always had a sane way of
> working with the kernel without including kernel headers in userspace
> which is the cause of many a problem.
>
> - Lovechild
>
> On Sat, 2003-06-21 at 00:40, Svyatogor wrote:
> > On Friday 20 June 2003 19:25, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> > >
> > > Anyhow, in general in Gentoo, if you compile something like iptable,
> > > nvidia-kernel, alsa, etc, it use the kernel headers in /usr/src/linux,
> > > as it is easier to manage (say you are running kernel from livecd,
> > > but want to compile whatever for your kernel that you will be
> > > booting ...).
> > Exactly, so it shouldn't be installing the headers in /usr/include/linux,
> > which is what linux-headers does.
>
>
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
>


Adam Trilling
agt10@columbia.edu

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-headers ebuild version.

[Svyatogor]

On Friday 20 June 2003 19:25, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
>
> Anyhow, in general in Gentoo, if you compile something like iptable,
> nvidia-kernel, alsa, etc, it use the kernel headers in /usr/src/linux,
> as it is easier to manage (say you are running kernel from livecd,
> but want to compile whatever for your kernel that you will be
> booting ...).
Exactly, so it shouldn't be installing the headers in /usr/include/linux, 
which is what linux-headers does.

-- 
Sergey Kuleshov <svyatogor@gentoo.org>
Let the Force be with us!


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list