LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Debian
User Name
Password
Debian This forum is for the discussion of Debian Linux.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 03-01-2009, 07:01 PM   #16
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 2,177

Rep: Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519

Mate, you don't have to take my word for it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Linus Torvalds
"The fact is, that the header files should match the library you link against, not the kernel you run on."
I'd highly recommend that you read his post, here:

Linux-Kernel Archive

Have fun!

Last edited by rkelsen; 03-01-2009 at 07:03 PM.
 
Old 03-01-2009, 07:07 PM   #17
Telemachos
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 754

Rep: Reputation: 59
That post was written in 2000 and talks about 2.2 and 2.4 kernels. I guess perhaps things have changed.

Edit: Actually older Debian documentation also says don't build kernel headers, but new documentation and the current tools do build/download headers. As I said, I don't know what to say.

Edit again: For whatever it's worth, I'm not really arguing with any confidence. I'm just reporting what I see in Debian. Also, in my own experience, I've done it the "wrong" way for a couple of years now without any incidents.

Last edited by Telemachos; 03-01-2009 at 07:09 PM.
 
Old 03-01-2009, 07:17 PM   #18
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 2,177

Rep: Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telemachos View Post
That post was written in 2000 and talks about 2.2 and 2.4 kernels. I guess perhaps things have changed.

Edit: Actually older Debian documentation also says don't build kernel headers, but new documentation and the current tools do build/download headers. As I said, I don't know what to say.

Edit again: For whatever it's worth, I'm not really arguing with any confidence. I'm just reporting what I see in Debian. Also, in my own experience, I've done it the "wrong" way for a couple of years now without any incidents.
Well I haven't read anything that supercedes that advice from the Head Cheese. I'd be grateful if someone could post something (other than anecdotal evidence) which does.
 
Old 03-01-2009, 07:26 PM   #19
Drakeo
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2008
Location: Urbana IL
Distribution: Slackware, Slacko,
Posts: 3,623
Blog Entries: 3

Rep: Reputation: 465Reputation: 465Reputation: 465Reputation: 465Reputation: 465
2.6.28.7 kernel Slackware It was a must for me to build it out side the /usr/src. I had to do the make 0=/home/user name/build/kernel this created all the symlinks for compiling later. and you must use the newest nvidia out. for some reason compiling in the /usr/src/linux it built and installed but a lot of problems with the library links. that's it plus it uses the 4vl2 but it does have the squashfs modules I like it is very smooth.
so read the compiles text cd /usr/src/linux-kernel then do the build make 0=/home/user name/build kernel oldconfig

Last edited by Drakeo; 03-01-2009 at 07:28 PM.
 
Old 03-01-2009, 07:31 PM   #20
Telemachos
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 754

Rep: Reputation: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkelsen View Post
Well I haven't read anything that supercedes that advice from the Head Cheese. I'd be grateful if someone could post something (other than anecdotal evidence) which does.
My experience is anecdotal evidence, but the Debian Kernel Handbook and the default behavior of Debian's module-assistant tool is not.

I've been Googling off and on since earlier today, and I can't find anything conclusive one way or the other. That said, I'm reasonably confident that if module-assistant's method was completely insane, lots of users would have seen the effects by now.
 
Old 03-02-2009, 02:14 AM   #21
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 2,177

Rep: Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519
Quote:
Originally Posted by Telemachos View Post
That said, I'm reasonably confident that if module-assistant's method was completely insane, lots of users would have seen the effects by now.
Unless it does more than just download & install kernel headers...

Another thought: Debian isn't really a "DIY" distro. You don't need to compile many things under Debian because of the huge software repository which is available in binary package form, installable with apt-get. This is probably why you've not experienced any problems.

Last edited by rkelsen; 03-02-2009 at 04:31 AM.
 
Old 03-02-2009, 05:18 AM   #22
Telemachos
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 754

Rep: Reputation: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by rkelsen View Post
Unless it does more than just download & install kernel headers...

Another thought: Debian isn't really a "DIY" distro. You don't need to compile many things under Debian because of the huge software repository which is available in binary package form, installable with apt-get. This is probably why you've not experienced any problems.
Yes and no. Debian defaults to using precompiled binaries with an APT tool (apt-get, aptitude, synaptic, etc.), and most users do that. However, I compile second versions of some programs rather than using the vanilla, system-wide version - eg, Perl & Ruby - and I have a few small things that Debian doesn't have so I compile those locally as well - eg, tint.

My guess is that you're right and behind the scenes, Debian somehow manages the proper connections between libc6 (Debian's glibc) and other kernel headers.

Edit: I posted a question about this on Debian Forums, so we will see if anyone there can clear this up for us.

Last edited by Telemachos; 03-02-2009 at 07:21 AM. Reason: Added link to Debian Forums
 
Old 03-02-2009, 10:19 AM   #23
jdkaye
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Location: Westgate-on-Sea, Kent, UK
Distribution: Debian Testing Amd64
Posts: 5,465

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Good idea and thanks. Please post any repsonses back here, ok?
Cheers,
jdk
 
Old 03-02-2009, 11:59 AM   #24
Telemachos
Member
 
Registered: May 2007
Distribution: Debian
Posts: 754

Rep: Reputation: 59
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdkaye View Post
Good idea and thanks. Please post any repsonses back here, ok?
In a nutshell, the first answer made me even more confident that building and installing new headers is fine in Debian. The old advice applied when people used to link /usr/include/linux to /usr/src/linux/include/linux and in that case, you can get problems related to glibc. However, Debian no longer (for some time, I think) creates such links and thus it simply isn't a problem.

See the Debian Forums post and/or this link which explains some of the issues.

Last edited by Telemachos; 03-02-2009 at 12:04 PM.
 
Old 03-02-2009, 04:22 PM   #25
rkelsen
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2004
Distribution: slackware
Posts: 2,177

Rep: Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519Reputation: 519
Quote:
Originally Posted by bugsbunny on the Debian forums
The /usr/include/linux tree isn't updated by any current methodology. And that tree is, in fact, part of the linux-libc-dev package and therefore linked with glibc.
There's the answer. Thanks for clearing this up Telemachos.

Apparently, under Debian, the kernel-headers package only contains the "in-tree" headers from the kernel source and not the libc headers (which are the ones which shouldn't be updated).

Slackware installs the entire kernel source tree as a single package, which I guess isn't really necessary unless you want to re-compile the kernel after installation (which many Slackers do... ).
 
Old 03-02-2009, 09:49 PM   #26
steveo314
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: May 2006
Location: 314
Distribution: Debian Squeeze
Posts: 5

Rep: Reputation: 0
where did you see 2.6.28 in squeeze at?????
 
Old 03-02-2009, 11:43 PM   #27
jdkaye
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Location: Westgate-on-Sea, Kent, UK
Distribution: Debian Testing Amd64
Posts: 5,465

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveo314 View Post
where did you see 2.6.28 in squeeze at?????
Quick answer: when I do
Code:
aptitude search linux-image
I get this:
Code:
$ aptitude search linux-image
v   linux-image                     -
v   linux-image-2.6                 -
i A linux-image-2.6-486             - Linux 2.6 image on x86
p   linux-image-2.6-686             - Linux 2.6 image on PPro/Celeron/PII/PIII/P
i A linux-image-2.6.26-1-486        - Linux 2.6.26 image on x86
i   linux-image-2.6.26-1-686        - Linux 2.6.26 image on PPro/Celeron/PII/PII
p   linux-image-2.6.26-1-686-bigmem - Linux 2.6.26 image on PPro/Celeron/PII/PII
p   linux-image-2.6.26-1-amd64      - Linux 2.6.26 image on AMD64
p   linux-image-2.6.26-1-openvz-686 - Linux 2.6.26 image on PPro/Celeron/PII/PII
p   linux-image-2.6.26-1-vserver-68 - Linux 2.6.26 image on PPro/Celeron/PII/PII
p   linux-image-2.6.26-1-vserver-68 - Linux 2.6.26 image on PPro/Celeron/PII/PII
p   linux-image-2.6.26-1-xen-686    - Linux 2.6.26 image on i686, oldstyle Xen s
p   linux-image-2.6.28-1-486        - Linux 2.6.28 image on x86
p   linux-image-2.6.28-1-686        - Linux 2.6.28 image on PPro/Celeron/PII/PII
p   linux-image-2.6.28-1-686-bigmem - Linux 2.6.28 image on PPro/Celeron/PII/PII
p   linux-image-2.6.28-1-amd64      - Linux 2.6.28 image on AMD64
I should mention that I do a modest amount of apt-pinning so there are sid repos in my sources list.
cheers,
jdk
 
Old 03-03-2009, 03:12 PM   #28
makuyl
Senior Member
 
Registered: Dec 2004
Location: Helsinki
Distribution: Debian Sid
Posts: 1,107

Rep: Reputation: 54
Only in unstable here:
Code:
~$apt-cache policy linux-image-2.6.28-1-686
linux-image-2.6.28-1-686:
  Installed: (none)
  Candidate: 2.6.28-1
  Version table:
     2.6.28-1 0
        990 ftp://ftp.fi.debian.org unstable/main Packages
 
Old 03-03-2009, 06:20 PM   #29
steveo314
LQ Newbie
 
Registered: May 2006
Location: 314
Distribution: Debian Squeeze
Posts: 5

Rep: Reputation: 0
ah ok... just curious. i didnt think 2.6.28 had made it into squeeze yet.
 
Old 03-03-2009, 09:42 PM   #30
jdkaye
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Dec 2008
Location: Westgate-on-Sea, Kent, UK
Distribution: Debian Testing Amd64
Posts: 5,465

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: Disabled
Quote:
Originally Posted by steveo314 View Post
ah ok... just curious. i didnt think 2.6.28 had made it into squeeze yet.
I don't think it has. As I mentioned above I do a modest amount of alt-pinning so I have both unstable and testing in my sources.list
Cheers,
jdk
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Howto: build Linux kernel module against installed kernel w/o full kernel source tree LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 09-03-2006 08:21 PM
Kernel 2.4 in Zipslack (Waring: unable to open an initial console | Kernel Panic...) kurtamos Linux - General 2 05-10-2006 12:58 PM
kernel includes at /usr/src/linux/include do not match current kernel. blanny Red Hat 1 03-09-2006 07:53 AM
kernel panic: try passing init= option to kernel...installation with Red Hat 9 kergen Linux - Hardware 1 09-30-2004 03:28 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Debian

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:12 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration