On Sat, Jul 22, 2000 at 08:11:07PM +0200, Martin Costabel wrote:
There *are* situations where you need /usr/src/linux to point to your
current kernel sources. This is when you compile modules for the current
kernel, a prominent example being MOL.
Actually, I prefer to add a -I/path/to/kernel/include to the module
makefiles rather than the /usr/src/linux symlink. I suppose it's
personal preference, but I find that having to explicitly specify
where the kernel source is reduces the posibility of a screwed
compile.
--
Josh
6B21489A | GnuPG ID/Fingerprint | huber@mclx.com |
61F0 6138 BE7B FEBF A223 E9D1 BFE1 2065 6B21 489A
On Mon, 24 Jul 2000, Josh Huber wrote:
On Sat, Jul 22, 2000 at 08:11:07PM +0200, Martin Costabel wrote:
quoted
There *are* situations where you need /usr/src/linux to point to your
current kernel sources. This is when you compile modules for the current
kernel, a prominent example being MOL.
Actually, I prefer to add a -I/path/to/kernel/include to the module
makefiles rather than the /usr/src/linux symlink. I suppose it's
personal preference, but I find that having to explicitly specify
where the kernel source is reduces the posibility of a screwed
compile.
Moreover, your method Josh is the only sane method IMHO. Trusting
/usr/src/linux to be correct for whatever kernel version you are
building against is Russian roulette (to put it lightly)...
Jeff
** Sent via the linuxppc-dev mail list. See http://lists.linuxppc.org/