Messages in this thread Patch in this message | | | Date | Thu, 27 Jul 2000 16:09:53 -0400 | From | "Theodore Y. Ts'o" <> | Subject | Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs |
| |
Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2000 11:56:38 -0700 (PDT) From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@transmeta.com>
I like this one. It puts the thing in the same tree as the modules themselves, so it's self-contained. Let's _document_ it as a symlink, and make "make modules_install" do that part too (I don't use modules so I'd rather somebody else sent me the tested - likely one-liner - patch to do this).
You asked for it, you got it.....
- Ted
P.S. Vendors should test this against their kernel packaging tools, which tend to do all sorts of non-standard stuff because they try to build build multiple kernels and multiple sets of modules from a single kernel source tree.
Patch generated: on Thu Jul 27 15:54:21 EDT 2000 by tytso@snap.thunk.org against Linux version 2.4.0test5-pre5 =================================================================== RCS file: RCS/Makefile,v retrieving revision 1.1 diff -u -r1.1 Makefile --- Makefile 2000/07/27 19:44:54 1.1 +++ Makefile 2000/07/27 19:51:12 @@ -306,13 +306,15 @@ modules_install: @( \ MODLIB=$(INSTALL_MOD_PATH)/lib/modules/$(KERNELRELEASE); \ + mkdir -p $$MODLIB; \ + rm -f $$MODLIB/build; \ + ln -s `pwd` $$MODLIB/build; \ cd modules; \ MODULES=""; \ inst_mod() { These="`cat $$1`"; MODULES="$$MODULES $$These"; \ mkdir -p $$MODLIB/$$2; cp $$These $$MODLIB/$$2; \ echo Installing modules under $$MODLIB/$$2; \ }; \ - mkdir -p $$MODLIB; \ \ if [ -f BLOCK_MODULES ]; then inst_mod BLOCK_MODULES block; fi; \ if [ -f NET_MODULES ]; then inst_mod NET_MODULES net; fi; \ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |