[lkml]   [1999]   [Nov]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: toplevel Makefile bug and simple fix
    Alan Cox wrote:
    > > > I'm not convinced /usr/include/linux is sufficient. Perhaps we need
    > > > a more explicit naming ?
    > >
    > > You are too brief - sufficient for what?
    > For kernel modules you want
    > <linux-versionnumber/foo.h>

    Doesn't this imply maintainance nightmares for source which
    includes foo.h? Or else more complexity in makefiles?

    I find it convenient to use `ln -s /usr/src/linux-<version>
    /usr/src/linux` with the customary symlinks in /usr/include.
    A makefile need only
    `ln -sf ...` to demand a version.

    It's handy for patching, too.

    OTOH I can see that someone more active than I might wish to
    make several versions simultaneously.


    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:54    [W:0.020 / U:13.356 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site