ok, i have and can install it. checked Documentation/Changes to check
versions of progs. it compiled nicely. boots nicely with a couple of minor
errors that i'll get round to. what i don't understand is what the hell is
going on with the header files??? have i missed something ? the nvidia
driver installer can't find them and vmware is more confused. yes there
are patches and i have used them, but what is the problem here? what is
the location of the header files ? i thought it is
/usr/src/linux-2.6.0/include or similar depending on where you have the
source files. i can't find any documentation which describes why the
header files are so screwed up. i don't code my own kernels for fun on a
sunny weekend nor do i spend hours on each cotton-picking piece of source
code to find out what the hell it is. so, in short, all i want to know is
why is there this trouble with the nvidia drivers, vmware and probably
many more that need to compile from the header files of the kernel ? maybe
i sound angry or just plain idiotic, but this logic is getting to me -
2.6.0 is classed as stable so it should have no problem, or did i have
blurred vision whilst reading kernel.org ?

PecanEater

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 05:42:11 +0000, PecanEater wrote:

> ok, i have and can install it. checked Documentation/Changes to check
> versions of progs. it compiled nicely. boots nicely with a couple of minor
> errors that i'll get round to. what i don't understand is what the hell is
> going on with the header files??? have i missed something ? the nvidia
> driver installer can't find them and vmware is more confused. yes there
> are patches and i have used them, but what is the problem here? what is
> the location of the header files ? i thought it is
> /usr/src/linux-2.6.0/include or similar depending on where you have the
> source files. i can't find any documentation which describes why the
> header files are so screwed up. i don't code my own kernels for fun on a
> sunny weekend nor do i spend hours on each cotton-picking piece of source
> code to find out what the hell it is. so, in short, all i want to know is
> why is there this trouble with the nvidia drivers, vmware and probably
> many more that need to compile from the header files of the kernel ? maybe
> i sound angry or just plain idiotic, but this logic is getting to me -
> 2.6.0 is classed as stable so it should have no problem, or did i have
> blurred vision whilst reading kernel.org ?
>
> PecanEater

I have experienced absolutely zero problems with the entire 2.6 series.
What distro you are using may help to diagnose the trouble, rahter than
having everyone guess at it. Is there a
symlink to the sources you want to use in /usr/src ?
ls -al /usr/src will tell.

--
The M$ warcry:
Quantity is no substitute for quality, but it's the only one we've got.

On Sun, 04 Jan 2004 19:36:00 +0000, nunya wrote:

>
> I have experienced absolutely zero problems with the entire 2.6 series.
> What distro you are using may help to diagnose the trouble, rahter than
> having everyone guess at it. Is there a
> symlink to the sources you want to use in /usr/src ?
> ls -al /usr/src will tell.

using slackware current tree but i'm not sure that's important as i've
installed the kernel from kernel.org. you see normally the headers are
sorted out in a package with distributions, but i can't figure out how to
do it with the kernel.org source. there are no packages for the 2.6.0
kernel for slackware. i've done a bit more reading and think installing
glibc from source will sort it out. the trouble, as i've found out, is
that my current glibc is compiled with older headers. now i have found
trouble installing glibc with the 2.6.0 kernel - it doesn't get passed the
config stage; though i have read from http://www.linuxfromscratch.org that
by touching 2 files you can get to the make stage, but that aborts halfway
through anyway. it seems to be a never ending list of problems.

PecanEater