Bug 26809 - kernel-headers rpm is in newest kernel errata
Summary: kernel-headers rpm is in newest kernel errata
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: kernel   
(Show other bugs)
Version: 6.2
Hardware: i386 Linux
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Arjan van de Ven
QA Contact: Brock Organ
: 26889 26976 27996 (view as bug list)
Depends On:
Blocks: 47259
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
Reported: 2001-02-09 10:33 UTC by Wissmann, Klaus
Modified: 2008-08-01 16:22 UTC (History)
5 users (show)

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2004-09-30 15:38:54 UTC
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)

External Trackers
Tracker ID Priority Status Summary Last Updated
Red Hat Product Errata RHSA-2001:047 normal SHIPPED_LIVE : Linux kernel 2.2.19 now available, provides security fixes, enhancements 2001-04-10 04:00:00 UTC

Description Wissmann, Klaus 2001-02-09 10:33:08 UTC
In the kernel update issued in RHSA-2001:013-05 the kernel-headers rpm is
missing. The headers are in the kernel-source rpm instead. Was this change
made intentionally? I really liked the the old way of separating the
headers and the rest of the source.

Comment 1 Daniel Roesen 2001-02-12 14:50:57 UTC
*** Bug 26889 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 2 Daniel Roesen 2001-02-12 14:59:10 UTC
*** Bug 26976 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 3 Chris Cogdon 2001-02-12 18:29:06 UTC
Just so its not missed: from bug 26889: The symbolic links /usr/include/
{linux,asm} are missing from the package, too.

Comment 4 Daniel Roesen 2001-02-12 19:26:25 UTC
Sorry, missed that. Thanx for the addition.

Comment 5 Michael K. Johnson 2001-02-13 20:58:48 UTC
The change was intentional, but the wrong idea, and will be changed
in a future errata kernel back to having a kernel-headers package.

The links are no longer part of the package; they are made in the
post-install script.

Comment 6 ncb 2001-02-14 15:02:56 UTC
Just what does "will be changed in a future errata kernel" mean?  Can we expect
a new set of RPMs soon (as in days), or do I need to extract the headers from
include/linux and include/asm-* by hand?

Comment 7 Michael K. Johnson 2001-02-14 15:54:24 UTC
You shouldn't need to extract anything by hand -- just install the
kernel-source rpm.

Comment 8 ncb 2001-02-14 16:38:25 UTC
Yes, I could do that.

However, that means installing a 45Mb RPM to get 7.5Mb of include files.  I've
got a bunch of "small" machines that I put on student desks that just don't have
the space to spare.  :/  I could leave it out completely, but that just doesn't
work in the College of Computing.  My users tend to get anoyed when they can't
compile programs.  :)

In short, I've got special requirements that make me dependant on the
kernel-headers package being seperate from the kernel-source package.  I can do
a work around if needed, but was hoping for an updated set of RPMs so I didn't
have to.

Comment 9 Michael K. Johnson 2001-02-14 16:54:04 UTC
Until we release the new version, there is in the spec file a
%define headersinsource 1
that you can can change to
%define headersinsource 0
and rebuild.  That will take care of your special requirements
in the meantime.

They were moved in so that we could use 2.4 headers even on a 2.2-based
system for building (with) a glibc that could take advantage of 2.4
functionality.  But that's not an issue for 6.x, so we'll move that back
in the next errata release.

Comment 10 giulioo 2001-02-17 08:14:38 UTC
*** Bug 27996 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 11 giulioo 2001-02-17 08:53:21 UTC
Note that just
%define headersinsource 0
won't probably be enough to build an headers rpm, see bug 18868

Comment 12 Wenzhuo Zhang 2001-02-18 15:38:34 UTC
The linux and asm symlinks aren't created in the post-install script either. 
They'll be created only when %headersinsource -eq 0.

[wenzhuo@marvin wenzhuo]$ rpm --scripts -q kernel-source
postinstall script (through /bin/sh):
cd /usr/src
rm -f linux
ln -snf linux-2.2.17 linux
if [ 1 -eq 0 ] ; then
        cd /usr/include
        rm -f linux asm
        ln -snf ../src/linux/include/linux linux
        ln -snf ../src/linux/include/asm asm
cd /boot
rm -f kernel.h
ln -snf kernel.h-2.2.17 kernel.h
exit 0

Comment 13 Michael K. Johnson 2001-02-21 22:07:10 UTC
No, that's correct.  headersinsource is done specifically so that
another package can provide headers unrelated to that kernel

So if headersinsource is 1, none of those links should be created;
they will be provided by a different package.  In Red Hat Linux 7.0,
this allows us to provide 2.4 kernel headers so that users can build
applications that can work with either the 2.4 or 2.2 kernel; part
of our attempt to be 2.4-kernel-ready in Red Hat Linux 7.0

If headersinsource is 0, then we have a separate kernel-headers package
created as a subpackage of the kernel package and we should create those

I know, it's hard to follow, but it really isn't a bug.

However, I *did* see bug 18868.

Comment 14 Hugh Bragg 2001-02-26 20:47:33 UTC
If this isn't a bug then why can't I compile masquerading in a bzImage on my
i586 anymore?

make[2]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux-2.2.17/net/ipv4'
make all_targets
make[3]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux-2.2.17/net/ipv4'
gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/linux-2.2.17/include -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2
-fomit-frame-pointer -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -fno-strength-reduce -m486
-malign-loops=2 -malign-jumps=2 -malign-functions=2 -DCPU=586   -DEXPORT_SYMTAB
-c ip_masq.c
ip_masq.c:578: `ip_masq_hash' undeclared here (not in a function)
ip_masq.c:578: initializer element for `__ksymtab_ip_masq_hash.value' is not
ip_masq.c:579: `ip_masq_unhash' undeclared here (not in a function)
ip_masq.c:579: initializer element for `__ksymtab_ip_masq_unhash.value' is not
ip_masq.c:518: warning: `masq_port_lock' defined but not used
make[3]: *** [ip_masq.o] Error 1
make[3]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.2.17/net/ipv4'
make[2]: *** [first_rule] Error 2
make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.2.17/net/ipv4'
make[1]: *** [_subdir_ipv4] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.2.17/net'
make: *** [_dir_net] Error 2

I suppose I should uninstall kernel-headers-2.2.16-3???
[root@wiz linux-2.2.17]# rpm -qa | grep kernel

But then, how could I compile anything
root@wiz linux-2.2.17]# rpm -ev kernel-headers-2.2.16-3
error: removing these packages would break dependencies:
	kernel-headers   is needed by glibc-devel-2.1.3-22
	kernel-headers >= 2.2.1 is needed by glibc-devel-2.1.3-22
	kernel-headers   is needed by glibc-devel-2.1.3-22
	kernel-headers >= 2.2.1 is needed by glibc-devel-2.1.3-22

Comment 15 Hugo van der Kooij 2001-03-10 11:32:34 UTC
All these bug reports could have been avoided if the kernel update document was
updated with all this info.
Sounds to me Q&A was not working at peak efficiency.

The question remains: Will removing the following procedure work and keep the
system sound and capable of compiling kernels and other software?

rpm -e kernel-headers kernel-source
rpm -Uvh kernel-source-2.2.17-14.sparc.rpm

Comment 16 tom 2001-03-28 22:18:39 UTC
I realize you're getting multiple bugs in this report, but I have a comment 
related to hugh.bragg's error (and this is the only bugzilla entry mentioning 
it so far).  I had to modify net/ipv4/ip_masq.c before my kernel would compile 
(upgrading stock RH6.2 with kernel 2.2.17-14).  I moved EXPORT_SYMBOL
(ip_masq_hash) and EXPORT_SYMBOL(ip_masq_unhash) to a point after those two 
functions were defined.

Comment 17 Hugh Bragg 2001-03-29 08:44:08 UTC
Hugo says rpm -e kernel-headers kernel-source
Nice if it were that simple, but the compiler depends on these.
rpm -e kernel-headers kernel-source glibc-devel egcs egcs-c++ egcs-objc
rpm -U kernel-source-2.2.17-14.i386.rpm 
rpm -i  --nodeps glibc-devel-2.1.3-22.i386.rpm egcs-1.1.2-30.i386.rpm
egcs-c++-1.1.2-30.i386.rpm egcs-objc-1.1.2-30.i386.rpm

If I don't do it with --nodeps it won't work. Is this OK?
Maybe I would be better off looking for a 2.2.18 kernel with a kernel-headers?

Comment 18 Bugzilla owner 2004-09-30 15:38:54 UTC
Thanks for the bug report. However, Red Hat no longer maintains this version of
the product. Please upgrade to the latest version and open a new bug if the problem

The Fedora Legacy project (http://fedoralegacy.org/) maintains some older releases, 
and if you believe this bug is interesting to them, please report the problem in
the bug tracker at: http://bugzilla.fedora.us/

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.