Patching kernel headers?

Patching kernel headers?

[Peter Smith]

I have built a toolchain with GCC 4.7.3, musl 1.1.6 and Linux 3.12 
kernel headers. I then tried to compile Busybox 1.23.1 without patching 
the toolchain kernel headers, as described here: 
http://wiki.musl-libc.org/wiki/Building_Busybox and the build was still 
successful.

Does this mean that patching the kernel headers is no longer necessary?

Re: Patching kernel headers?

[Szabolcs Nagy]

* Peter Smith <aic0azee@openmailbox.org> [2015-03-11 16:33:54 +0100]:
> I have built a toolchain with GCC 4.7.3, musl 1.1.6 and Linux 3.12 kernel
> headers. I then tried to compile Busybox 1.23.1 without patching the
> toolchain kernel headers, as described here:
> http://wiki.musl-libc.org/wiki/Building_Busybox and the build was still
> successful.
> 
> Does this mean that patching the kernel headers is no longer necessary?

did you use an allyes busybox config?

only some of the tools use conflicting headers

(some kernel headers are incompatible with libc headers
busybox might got fixed not to include those but other
code may still need the patched kernel headers)

Re: Patching kernel headers?

[Peter Smith]

On 2015-03-11 17:14, Szabolcs Nagy wrote:
> * Peter Smith <aic0azee@openmailbox.org> [2015-03-11 16:33:54 +0100]:
>> I have built a toolchain with GCC 4.7.3, musl 1.1.6 and Linux 3.12 
>> kernel
>> headers. I then tried to compile Busybox 1.23.1 without patching the
>> toolchain kernel headers, as described here:
>> http://wiki.musl-libc.org/wiki/Building_Busybox and the build was 
>> still
>> successful.
>> 
>> Does this mean that patching the kernel headers is no longer 
>> necessary?
> 
> did you use an allyes busybox config?
> 
> only some of the tools use conflicting headers
> 
> (some kernel headers are incompatible with libc headers
> busybox might got fixed not to include those but other
> code may still need the patched kernel headers)

I have now investigated further, and both the current and previous 
version of Busybox will build without patching the kernel headers, when 
using my custom Busybox config. If I try to build Busybox with an allyes 
config it will fail. Nothing has changed, I have just found out that my 
specific Busybox config will work without patching the kernel headers.

Are there any reasons for me to patch the kernel headers now that I 
found out Busybox will build anyway? Could other applications require 
the headers to be patched?