Re: Dosemu 1.3.2 and linux 2.6.7 headers

[Stas Sergeev <stsp@aknet.ru>]

Hello.

Hufnus wrote:
> After some googling I think I finally found the
> correct linux-libc-headers (as they are now called).
> http://ep09.pld-linux.org/~mmazur/linux-libc-headers/ <http://ep09.pld-linux.org/%7Emmazur/linux-libc-headers/>
Yes, that's the "correct" headers,
but unfortunately it doesn't save
the world. This project was rather
ambitious, but I am not sure it have
achieved all of its goals. The
intention was, AFAIK, to merge the
headers back to the kernel tree so
that the kernel folks to maintain
it - failed. The other intention
was to convince the distributors to
include it - I think this hasn't
happened too.
Now you are really supposed to use
the headers with which your glibc
was compiled! And even though the
headers you've found are the "correct"
ones, your glibc was not compiled with
those:( So the original suggestion
still stays - using the slackware
package of the 2.4 headers will work
the best:(
Note that compiling your software
with 2.4 headers doesn't mean that you
have to use the 2.4 kernel too. It
actually means nothing. You won't loose
any feature. Choosing the proper headers,
even if they are very old, will never
make your software any harm.

> just now that they have an alternate 2.6 kernel in the
> distribution and note that it is an alternate!
kernel is the one thing, glibc-kernheaders
is another. One have to understand that
the glibc-kernheaders are not the same
as those that come with the kernel. And
now slackware have the 2.6 set of the
glibc-kernheaders (or whatever they call it).
No matter what kernel you use, the software
(like dosemu) must compile with that headers
(if glibc was compiled with them, at least).
To the best of my knowledge, this is not the
case with the slackware. The problem with
pci.h, according to what I've heard, is
there in their "sanitized" set of 2.6 headers,
which is not good AFAICT. If you can verify
this - would be nice.

> now I am going to switch to the libc headers or "sanitized
> kernel headers", since they seem robust enough and I am
> now aware of them...
Not so fast - you need the headers your
glibc was compiled with - thats the problem.