Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > The vendor, I think. kernel-header-x.xx and kernel-source > packages have always assumed ownership of /usr/src; this is not a new > libc6 thing.
It's new for anyone who has never had kernel-headers and kernel-source installed before now (because presumably they were using kernel-package). Maybe I'm the only one, but I just wanted to post a heads-up before other people were affected. And regardless, I think we might need to make the /usr/src/ policy clear. (Perhaps it is already and I just wasn't paying enough attention.) > I find this hard to believe. kernel-headers and kernel-source > packages write to the directories kernel-headers-X.X.XX and > kernel-source-X.X.XX. They create symbolic links /usr/src/linux and > /usr/src/linux-X.X.Xx. > > They most certainly do not clobber existing local headers in > /usr/src/linux!! I think you overlooked part of my post. I mentioned that *I* had created /usr/src/linux as a link to /usr/src/linux-my-kernel-version. Then when I installed kernel-headers (because the new libc6-dev made me), kernel-headers saw the link, decided it was OK, and proceeded to write it's files into /usr/src/my-kernel-version. I'm not claiming this is a bug, since I think it's becoming clear that I shouldn't have made the link in the first place, but I was a little surprised, and I think others might be as well. > I think this is the case. This is not new, (21 months is old > in the Debian world); but I do agree this needs to be better > advertized. Right. That seems to be the most likely conclusion. Sooner or later we'll probably also need a FAQ. I can see a large number of questions being caused by people following the Linux (Kernel) HOWTO's and making a mess of /usr/src. -- Rob Browning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> PGP fingerprint = E8 0E 0D 04 F5 21 A0 94 53 2B 97 F5 D6 4E 39 30 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
