[gentoo-dev] linux-headers-2.6* now linux26-headers

[gentoo-dev] linux-headers-2.6* now linux26-headers

[Travis Tilley]

just a heads up - i've moved all the 2.6 header packages to 
sys-kernel/linux26-headers so that they can be keyworded without having them 
accidentally install on the system of a 2.4 kernel user. hopefully soon this 
will mean we can unmask the newer glibc ebuilds on x86, which have a dep on 
the 2.6 headers when using nptl (instead of using /usr/src/linux, which is 
problematic at best and quite often broken at worst).

another note re: NPTL is that nptl no longer has a version number of it's own 
as of 2004-06-29. i'm guessing this means that ulrich drepper considers nptl 
to be fairly stable, but i dont think i'll be so quick to put words in his 
mouth. when i'm sure that everything's good and calm with the linux26-headers 
change i'll poke at making a new snapshot to see if it passes "make check" 
yet. :)

-- 

Travis Tilley <lv@gentoo.org>

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-headers-2.6* now linux26-headers

[Alvin Thompson]

Travis Tilley wrote:

>just a heads up - i've moved all the 2.6 header packages to 
>sys-kernel/linux26-headers so that they can be keyworded without having them 
>accidentally install on the system of a 2.4 kernel user. hopefully soon this 
>will mean we can unmask the newer glibc ebuilds on x86, which have a dep on 
>the 2.6 headers when using nptl (instead of using /usr/src/linux, which is 
>problematic at best and quite often broken at worst).
>
>another note re: NPTL is that nptl no longer has a version number of it's own 
>as of 2004-06-29. i'm guessing this means that ulrich drepper considers nptl 
>to be fairly stable, but i dont think i'll be so quick to put words in his 
>mouth. when i'm sure that everything's good and calm with the linux26-headers 
>change i'll poke at making a new snapshot to see if it passes "make check" 
>yet. :)
>
>  
>
all i know is compiling lvm2 chokes on the new headers...  :(

-alvin


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-headers-2.6* now linux26-headers

[Travis Tilley]

On Monday 12 July 2004 12:21 am, Alvin Thompson wrote:
> all i know is compiling lvm2 chokes on the new headers...  :(

[ebuild   R   ] sys-kernel/linux26-headers-2.6.6-r1

(stuff)

>>> sys-fs/lvm2-2.00.15 merged.
>>> Recording sys-fs/lvm2 in "world" favorites file...

it works here for me... try re-emerging the headers, you might have snagged em 
before i hit a fairly large bug in migrating... make defconfig didnt work 
unless you already had headers installed, so uninstalling linux-headers to 
install linux26-headers caused headaches for about a day or so. :/

-- 

Travis Tilley <lv@gentoo.org>

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-headers-2.6* now linux26-headers

[Alan Schmitt]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1392 bytes --]

* Travis Tilley (lv@gentoo.org) wrote:
> just a heads up - i've moved all the 2.6 header packages to 
> sys-kernel/linux26-headers so that they can be keyworded without having them 
> accidentally install on the system of a 2.4 kernel user. hopefully soon this 
> will mean we can unmask the newer glibc ebuilds on x86, which have a dep on 
> the 2.6 headers when using nptl (instead of using /usr/src/linux, which is 
> problematic at best and quite often broken at worst).
> 
> another note re: NPTL is that nptl no longer has a version number of it's own 
> as of 2004-06-29. i'm guessing this means that ulrich drepper considers nptl 
> to be fairly stable, but i dont think i'll be so quick to put words in his 
> mouth. when i'm sure that everything's good and calm with the linux26-headers 
> change i'll poke at making a new snapshot to see if it passes "make check" 
> yet. :)

Following the announcement that the linux26 headers were now ~x86, I 
decided to try them, along with the migration to nptl. After a (longish 
;-) ) emerge -e system, everything seems to work fine (I just had some 
trouble starting X, but emerging nvidia-glx and nvidia-kernel solved 
it).

I know this is just a WFM message, but it might encourage others to try 
it.

Alan Schmitt

-- 
The hacker: someone who figured things out and made something cool happen.
.O.
..O
OOO

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-headers-2.6* now linux26-headers

[Aaron Walker]

Alan Schmitt wrote:
> * Travis Tilley (lv@gentoo.org) wrote:
> 
>>just a heads up - i've moved all the 2.6 header packages to 
>>sys-kernel/linux26-headers so that they can be keyworded without having them 
>>accidentally install on the system of a 2.4 kernel user. hopefully soon this 
>>will mean we can unmask the newer glibc ebuilds on x86, which have a dep on 
>>the 2.6 headers when using nptl (instead of using /usr/src/linux, which is 
>>problematic at best and quite often broken at worst).
>>
>>another note re: NPTL is that nptl no longer has a version number of it's own 
>>as of 2004-06-29. i'm guessing this means that ulrich drepper considers nptl 
>>to be fairly stable, but i dont think i'll be so quick to put words in his 
>>mouth. when i'm sure that everything's good and calm with the linux26-headers 
>>change i'll poke at making a new snapshot to see if it passes "make check" 
>>yet. :)
> 
> 
> Following the announcement that the linux26 headers were now ~x86, I 
> decided to try them, along with the migration to nptl. After a (longish 
> ;-) ) emerge -e system, everything seems to work fine (I just had some 
> trouble starting X, but emerging nvidia-glx and nvidia-kernel solved 
> it).
> 
> I know this is just a WFM message, but it might encourage others to try 
> it.
> 
> Alan Schmitt
> 

I agree.  2.6 kernel + 2.6 headers + NPTL seems rock solid to me.  I've 
been using it on several boxen since linux-headers-2.6.0.ebuild (6 mos? 
8? I suck at estimating time...) was first put in portage and have had 
*very* few problems.

Just wanted to thank the devs for the awesome job they have done on 
getting 2.6 and NPTL ready for the masses.

Cheers
-- 
A squeegee by any other name wouldn't sound as funny.

/*  Aaron Walker
  *  http://butsugenjitemple.org/~ka0ttic/
  */


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-headers-2.6* now linux26-headers

[Wade Nelson]

Aaron Walker wrote:
> Alan Schmitt wrote:
> 
>> * Travis Tilley (lv@gentoo.org) wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>> I know this is just a WFM message, but it might encourage others to 
>> try it.
>>
>> Alan Schmitt
>>
> 
> I agree.  2.6 kernel + 2.6 headers + NPTL seems rock solid to me.  I've 
> been using it on several boxen since linux-headers-2.6.0.ebuild (6 mos? 
> 8? I suck at estimating time...) was first put in portage and have had 
> *very* few problems.
> 
> Just wanted to thank the devs for the awesome job they have done on 
> getting 2.6 and NPTL ready for the masses.
> 
> Cheers

I can back this up also, I've not had a headers-related problem since I 
merged 2.6.6-r1 when it had just hit portage.... emerge -e world, 400+ 
packages. Even mplayer compiles :)

Portage 2.0.51_pre12 (default-x86-2004.0, gcc-3.3.3, 
glibc-2.3.4.20040605-r1, 2.6.7-hb3)
=================================================================
System uname: 2.6.7-hb3 i686 AMD Athlon(tm)
Gentoo Base System version 1.5.1
Autoconf: sys-devel/autoconf-2.59-r4
Automake: sys-devel/automake-1.8.5-r1
Binutils: sys-devel/binutils-2.14.90.0.8-r1
CFLAGS="-march=athlon-xp -O2 -pipe -mcpu=athlon-xp -fomit-frame-pointer"

My understanding is that glibc >=2.3.4 no longer references 
/usr/src/linux, therefore it would be beneficial to have a solid ~arch 
2.6 headerset for the sake of nptl and sanity and such.

The change from linux-headers-2.6.6 linux26-headers also went fine here.

--Wade

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-headers-2.6* now linux26-headers

[Aaron Walker]

Travis Tilley wrote:
> just a heads up - i've moved all the 2.6 header packages to 
> sys-kernel/linux26-headers so that they can be keyworded without having them 
> accidentally install on the system of a 2.4 kernel user. hopefully soon this 
> will mean we can unmask the newer glibc ebuilds on x86, which have a dep on 
> the 2.6 headers when using nptl (instead of using /usr/src/linux, which is 
> problematic at best and quite often broken at worst).
> 
> another note re: NPTL is that nptl no longer has a version number of it's own 
> as of 2004-06-29. i'm guessing this means that ulrich drepper considers nptl 
> to be fairly stable, but i dont think i'll be so quick to put words in his 
> mouth. when i'm sure that everything's good and calm with the linux26-headers 
> change i'll poke at making a new snapshot to see if it passes "make check" 
> yet. :)
> 

Just curious, but I was wondering:  If linux26-headers is being used 
rather than linux-headers, should virtual/os-headers be changed to 
linux26-headers?

The reason I am asking is because some things that depend on 
virtual/os-headers, now want to install linux-headers...

My apologies if this should've been posted to gentoo-user@

Cheers
-- 
fortune: cannot execute.  Out of cookies.

/*  Aaron Walker
  *  http://butsugenjitemple.org/~ka0ttic/
  */


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-headers-2.6* now linux26-headers

[Mike Williams]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 524 bytes --]

On Tuesday 13 July 2004 15:41, Aaron Walker wrote:
> Just curious, but I was wondering:  If linux26-headers is being used
> rather than linux-headers, should virtual/os-headers be changed to
> linux26-headers?
>
> The reason I am asking is because some things that depend on
> virtual/os-headers, now want to install linux-headers...

linux26-headers will PROVIDE virtual/os-headers.
So anything that DEPENDs on virtual/os-headers will be satisfied.

Changing the default will break a lot.

-- 
Mike Williams

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-headers-2.6* now linux26-headers

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1686 bytes --]

On Sat, 2004-07-10 at 02:58, Travis Tilley wrote:
> just a heads up - i've moved all the 2.6 header packages to 
> sys-kernel/linux26-headers so that they can be keyworded without having them 
> accidentally install on the system of a 2.4 kernel user. hopefully soon this 
> will mean we can unmask the newer glibc ebuilds on x86, which have a dep on 
> the 2.6 headers when using nptl (instead of using /usr/src/linux, which is 
> problematic at best and quite often broken at worst).
> 

I and Solar is working on getting bootstrap-2.6.sh (or maby an
merged version) ready to work seemlessly with linux26-headers.
Hopefully in the next two weeks if testing are going as planned.

> another note re: NPTL is that nptl no longer has a version number of it's own 
> as of 2004-06-29. i'm guessing this means that ulrich drepper considers nptl 
> to be fairly stable, but i dont think i'll be so quick to put words in his 
> mouth. when i'm sure that everything's good and calm with the linux26-headers 
> change i'll poke at making a new snapshot to see if it passes "make check" 
> yet. :)

I do not know about non-x86 arches, but I make sure 'make check' pass
for NPTL as well as run it for a day or two before commit.

I think the biggest problem with getting it into stable previously
(and for the next few weeks), is the headers issue - we could not
just unmask 2.6 headers.  Hopefully if 2.6.6-r1 or latest 2.6.7
linux26-headers test ok, and we get headway with bootstrap.sh, we
can really think about 'offical' NPTL support ...


Cheers,

-- 

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 --]