On Tue, Apr 11, 2006 at 10:11:19AM +0100, Matt Darcy wrote: > > b.) multiple platforms to support - eg system built from 2.6.15 2.6.16 > and 2.6.17-rc2 headers - then couple that with users deviating from the > book's package versions, well, it will just become unsupportable and not > help LFS's reputation as a usable stable platform
I think this thread has wavered from its initial intent. The only aspect I was referring to is for the next release. As udev_update will be merged to trunk this week, the time is upon us for preparing for a testing branch. Currently there are certain headers missing from llh that would be good to have in this release. I am only concerned with what headers should be added to llh (in the form of a patch). Once trunk branches to testing, then something else can be done. I'm not saying we should discuss that aspect until the testing branch is cut, but I think it more apropo to discuss what to do for the next release first. It needs to be a small enough change to not require extensive additional testing (e.g., no building of glibc with raw headers). Dan and others have provided various links. So far these seem to be for the inotify header and for additional syscalls. So the 2 questions for Jim, Ryan, Ikonia, Greg, and anyone else intimately familiar with this situation are: 1) Which additional headers *should* be added to llh now for a glibc-2.3.6 / kernel-2.6.16.x system, and 2) Can these be sanitizied and turned into a patch for llh quickly? -- Archaic Want control, education, and security from your operating system? Hardened Linux From Scratch http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/hlfs -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
