[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Linux-libre

From: Andreas Enge
Subject: Re: Linux-libre
Date: Thu, 29 May 2014 19:08:00 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)

On Thu, May 29, 2014 at 05:53:46PM +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote:
> The problem is that the headers are what libc builds against.  It
> doesn’t need the latest version (in fact, we build it with
> --enable-kernel=2.6.30.)

I still do not quite get it. If not necessary, it would albeit be allowed to
have the same versions, no? Then why do we not make this choice and maybe
update to a long term kernel in core-updates as suggested in the discussion
following ?
How about creating one package linux-libre with two outputs 'out' and

When I noticed that udev was looking for kmod, I started packaging it. The
debian web page states it is a replacement of module-init-tools, and indeed
it seems to contain the same binaries (lsmod etc.). I tried to configure udev
with module-init-tools as an input, but it still asks for kmod. Our linux-libre
package has module-init-tools as an input; should we use kmod instead? Then
if kmod requires the kernel headers, my suggestion of the previous paragraph
would not work.

> I suspect the problem is that linux-libre-headers is build with the
> default config, which may lack some features, and so as a side effect
> some headers are not installed.
> Would you like to look into it?  Or maybe Alírio?  :-)

I am having a quick look at it, but I would gladly step back for someone more
knowledgeable! My only interest in all this is actually to compile kdelibs;
my bug report that it does not require udev according to its configure phase,
but does not compile without it, has not seen a resolution so far.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]