Re: Crosstool's sanitized headers

[Trevor Harmon <trevor at vocaro dot com>]

On Feb 19, 2006, at 9:33 PM, Dan Kegel wrote:

> On 2/19/06, Trevor Harmon <trevor@vocaro.com> wrote:
> > Crosstool supports "sanitized Linux headers". What exactly is a
> > "sanitized" header?
>
> It's a kernel header cleansed of any details not needed by glibc.
> There have been many such sanitized header packages; the one
> I use is at http://ep09.pld-linux.org/~mmazur/linux-libc-headers/
> and seems to be popular.

Okay, so in other words sanitized headers are used only for  
bootstrapping glibc?  I assume I can delete them once glibc has been  
successfully compiled?

> > Also, in crosstool-0.38, many (all?) of the .dat files specify both
> > LINUX_SANITIZED_HEADER_DIR and LINUX_DIR. However, crosstool issues a
> > warning if both are specified and ignores LINUX_DIR (see line 43 of
> > crosstool.sh). Is this a bug in the .dat files?
>
> No, it's just a rough edge.

But normally one would use identical versions, right? Isn't it  
possible that if I specify different numbers, then the LINUX_DIR  
tests could fail simply because the version is too old/new?

Trevor

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature