On Fri, 2006-08-25 at 22:02 -0500, Chris Adams wrote: > I thought the idea of having a relatively static set of kernel headers > used was because you were supposed to use the kernel headers that your > glibc was built against, and that you were not supposed to just update > the kernel headers along with the kernel. Or has the kernel headers > cleanup/export made that a thing of the past? You don't _have_ to update the kernel headers along with the kernel, although it should be perfectly safe to do so -- the ABI represented therein should not be changing in incompatible ways. It's perfectly feasible that we'll release kernel errata for FC6 _without_ releasing the kernel-headers packages to match. Having kernel headers come directly from the kernel in a usable form, instead of being maintained separately, was the whole _point_ of the cleanup/export in the kernel tree. It means we get new syscalls, new ioctls, etc. immediately rather than only when someone notices they're missing and files a bug for them. -- dwmw2 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
