From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 10630 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2004 14:41:49 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 13 Jul 2004 14:41:49 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BkOTd-0006jB-0A for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Tue, 13 Jul 2004 14:41:49 +0000 Received: (qmail 23382 invoked by uid 89); 13 Jul 2004 14:41:48 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 23673 invoked from network); 13 Jul 2004 14:41:48 +0000 Message-ID: <40F3F4A8.4070207@butsugenjitemple.org> Date: Tue, 13 Jul 2004 10:41:44 -0400 From: Aaron Walker User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.7.1 (X11/20040630) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev References: <200407092058.23820.lv@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200407092058.23820.lv@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] linux-headers-2.6* now linux26-headers X-Archives-Salt: 4490542d-11af-47a7-8351-6591bd98f9a5 X-Archives-Hash: aa87b6cf98d0c984a78f2cb798418980 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