Updating kernel and kernel headers ?

[Auke Kok]

On 05/25/2012 02:04 PM, Duncan Gibson wrote:
> I wrote:
>>> Now that linux has been bumped from 3.3.6 to 3.4 do we also
>>> need to have a similar update for kernel-headers?
>>>
>>> Isn't there a better/automatic way of keepin them synchronised?
>
> zbiggy wrote:
>> Unfortunately our kernels is complete mess now except linux.
>> [...]
>> I would like to see our kernels in sync with layout  on kernel.org:
>>
>> Lunar module:     kernel.org naming:    lunar version: kernel.org version:
>> linux             mainline              3.4            3.4
>> linux-stable      Latest Stable Kernel  3.1.10*        3.3.7
>> linux-unstable    stable                3.2.16*        3.2.18
>> linux-2.6-stable  stable                2.6.39.4*      2.6.35.13
>
> It's probably wise for lunar to be in sync with kernel.org but that was
> not really my question. What I was concerned about was that we have only
> two kernel header modules, one corresponding to the 2.6 kernel, while
> the other one has to match three different 3.x kernels. Do we need more?
>
> I suppose what I was really wondering about is:
> (a) should we have one kernel-headers module per linux module, and
> (b) can we ensure that the correct linux/header pairs are installed?

due to the way we build glibc we need to keep kernel-headers back 2-3 
kernel versions, otherwise a lot of people will be in pain when they 
install and start compiling.

a good example was 3-4 weeks ago, when linux was at 3.2 but 
kernel-headers was at 3.3, or something like that. It was impossible to 
recompile glibc at that time until that got resolved.

So, in general, if the kernel is at 3.4.x, kernel-headers should be at 
3.2 or even 3.0.

Auke