[PLUG] RH 8.0 Kernel Compiling
Kyle Accardi
sandbox at pacifier.com
Tue Nov 26 03:34:22 UTC 2002
Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> On Mon, 2002-11-25 at 15:55, Richard Steffens wrote:
>
>>"Karl M. Hegbloom" wrote:
>>
>>
>>>When you install the Debian kernel-source package, it drops a .tar.bz of
>>>the kernel into /usr/src. That tarball opens up into
>>>"kernel-source-<version>/", rather than into "linux/", so that you can
>>>have the sources to several kernels installed without conflict.
>>>
>>>I would assume that Red Hat does the similar.
>>
>>Thanks, Karl. I was hoping to find that to be the case, too. However, in
>>/usr/src/linux-2.4.18-14/README, under the section "INSTALLING the
>>kernel:" it says:
>>
>>------------
>>"If you install the full sources, put the kernel tarball in a directory
>>where you have permissions (eg. your home directory) and unpack it..."
>>
>>"Do NOT use the /usr/src/linux area! This area has a usually incomplete)
>>set of kernel headers that are used by the library header files. They
>>should match the library, and not get messed up by whatever the
>>kernel-du-jour happens to be."
>
> Oh, wow. That's really way bogus. The libc6-dev package ought to ship
> the <linux/*> and <asm/*> headers and install them under /usr/include,
> rather than symlinking to ones in /usr/src/linux.
I don't think RedHat has put system headers in /usr/src/linux for a while
now. (Not sure if 6.2 did or not.) They are in the proper place now, that
being /usr/include/linux. Maybe their warning has more to do with some
stupid apps & libraries that look to /usr/src/linux for headers.
> It's also bogus that Linus ships the kernel sources tarred up so they
> open to "linux/" like that. I wonder how many times people have opened
> up a new kernel tarball right over the top of the old, realizing too
> late that they forgot to move the old one aside for safe keeping?
Agreed. In RedHat 7.3 (and this started a little earlier) RedHat doesn't
use /usr/src/linux for anything. Instead you'll see
/usr/src/linux-2.4.18-17.7.x, so you would be safe to untar an official
kernel tarball there.
On Mon, 2002-11-25 at 18:39, Paul Heinlein wrote:
> The only exception to the "grab the kernel.org tarball" would be the
> case where you rely on a patch set that Red Hat has made to work:
> user-mode Linux, LVM, crypto API, blue tooth, gigabit-over-copper
> ethernet, or what-have-you. In that case, I'd recommend just using Red
> Hat's build rather than struggling long and hard for the pretty
> dubious return of duplicating Red Hat's stock kernel.
Karl M. Hegbloom wrote:
> This is another part of the kernel building process in which Debian's
> system really shines. Not only are there "kernel-source-<version>"
> packages (which only install a Linux source .tar.bz2, not the Debian
> kernel building setup, which is installed by the "kernel-package"
> package), there are many "kernel-patch-*" packages.
It would be nice if RedHat released their kernel patches as a seperate
rpm/s. Maybe that's their "value add" and they expect you to just diff the
source if you really want to know.
--
Kyle Accardi
More information about the PLUG
mailing list