This is the mail archive of the libc-help@sourceware.org mailing list for the glibc project.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |
Other format: | [Raw text] |
On Monday 14 September 2009 07:43:52 Carlos O'Donell wrote: > On Sun, Sep 13, 2009 at 10:31 PM, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Sunday 13 September 2009 22:03:53 Alexander Haley wrote: > >> for example: /usr/include/scsi/scsi.h - the linux kernel's make > >> headers_install provides one, so does glibc's make install .... > >> > >> I'm not even sure of what my 'thought / question process' should be so > >> as to arrive at a decision about which to keep ... any suggestions and > >> or teaching about 'how things are put together' that will help me > >> understand the answer? > > > > they're pretty much the same thing. most people use the one from glibc. > > IMO, everyone, except for a handful of people, use the C Library headers. > > The standard distribution build process is: > * Install kernel headers (required by glibc build) > * Build glibc. > * Package glibc + kernel header files as the glibc/glibc development > packages. > > It is the responsibility of C library to keep your application > building, and sometimes that means overriding kernel header files. > However, this happens much less now given the kernel's assurance that > the header install target produces something useful for userspace. wrt scsi/, i'm pretty sure it's more a matter of the kernel headers didnt use to provide them. considering glibc requires linux-2.6 headers now for nptl, seems like it'd make sense to drop them. -mike
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Index Nav: | [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index] | |
---|---|---|
Message Nav: | [Date Prev] [Date Next] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] |