Re: older kernels + new glibc?

[Matthew Reppert <repp0017@tc.umn.edu>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1552 bytes --]

On Mon, 2004-03-29 at 16:27, DervishD wrote:
>     Hi Richard :)
> 
>  * Richard B. Johnson <root@chaos.analogic.com> dixit:
> > For glibc compatibility you need to get rid of the sym-link(s)
> > /usr/include/asm and /usr/include/linux in older distributions.
> > You need to replace those with headers copied from the kernel
> > in use when the C runtime library was compiled. If you can't find
> > those, you can either upgrade your C runtime library, or copy
> > headers from some older kernel that was known to work.
> > In any event, you need to remove the sym-link that ends up
> > pointing to your 'latest and greatest' kernel.
> 
>     Mmm, I'm confused. As far as I knew, you *should* use symlinks to
> your current (running) kernel includes for /usr/include/asm and
> /usr/include/linux. I've been doing this for years (in fact I
> compiled my libc back in the 2.2 days IIRC), without problems. Why it
> should be avoided and what kind of problems may arise if someone
> (like me) has those symlinks?

See http://www.kernelnewbies.org/faq/index.php3#headers

The correct place, I've read, to get the headers for the current running
kernel is /lib/modules/$(uname -r)/build/include ... which of course
assumes that you keep your kernel in the same place you built it from,
but that's not a worse assumption than whatever you'd assume for
/usr/include/{linux,asm} symlinks to work I'm sure.

Basically, the potential problem as I understand it is binary
incompatibility with the currently installed glibc.

Matt

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]