Shouldn't glibc-devel r: kernel-headers?

[wrobell]

On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 05:42:44PM +0200, Michal Moskal wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 05:51:28PM +0200, wrobell wrote:
> > On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 03:07:31PM +0200, Michal Moskal wrote:
> > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2002 at 01:53:20PM +0200, Mariusz Mazur wrote:
> > > > On Friday 11 October 2002 23:37, Michal Moskal wrote:
> > > > > Glibc references some <asm/*.h> files. They are in kernel-headers
> > > > > package. Shouldn't therefore glibc-devel require kernel-headers?
> > > > 
> > > > I thought about it too (I stumbled across this yesterday when something didn't 
> > > > want to build although all BuildRequires were met). Wouldn't it be ok to just 
> > > > provide a kernel-fake.noarch.rpm for people not using disto kernel?
> > > 
> > > I guess this is better idea then hacks with %{?_without_dist_kernel:...}
> > > all over the specs.
> > > 
> > > Anyway I heard somewhere about moving <asm/*> to glibc-devel (in rh, or
> > > somewhere). Wouldn't that be a good idea?
> > 
> > No, because it will overwrite used asm headers from non-distro
> > kernel.
> 
> I guess one should use kernel headers that was used during glibc
> compilation?
I do not think so.

For example take PLD Ra situation where 2.2 kernel
is used. I had been using Ra glibc very long time 
with kernel 2.4.x.

There are some situations when you should recompile
your glibc, but they are rare.

    wrobell <wrobell at ite.pl>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : /mailman/pipermail/pld-devel-en/attachments/20040626/24a61127/attachment-0002.bin