Re: version.h in 2.2.10

Miquel van Smoorenburg (miquels@cistron.nl)
21 Jun 1999 17:22:40 +0200

In article <cistron.5lso7l1wpw.fsf@tequila.cs.yale.edu>,
Stefan Monnier <monnier+lists/linux/kernel/news/@tequila.cs.yale.edu> wrote:
>>>>>> "Miquel" == Miquel van Smoorenburg <miquels@cistron.nl> writes:
>> Yet another reason _not_ to make /usr/include/{linux,asm} symlinks to
>> the kernel tree. Some distributions just include known-good kernel headers
>
>Indeed, the kernel tree in my case is in my home directory so it
>would be bugly (butt-ugly) to have symlinks from /usr/include to my
>home directory, wouldn't it ?
>I think that kernel header files should be handled along with and in the same
>way as System.map, .config, zImage and modules, all copied and installed
>together.

Well, no, I think it should be possible to have /usr/include/linux which
bears no relation to the running kernel at all. In fact that is the case
on all Debian/Linux systems ;)

You can easily compile kernel modules with -I/usr/src/linux-2.2.10 if
you want, so the excuse "/usr/src/linux MUST point to the kernel includes"
is not valid.

However, there still is one problem. Some applications that use kernel
interfaces that aren't quite integrated into (g)libc yet sometimes
use #include <linux/whatever.h>, like gated with Alexeys latest patches.
If you compile those with -I/usr/src/linux-2.2.10, then a
#include <net/route.h> will include the one from /usr/src/linux/include/net
instead of /usr/include/net, and those are _very_ different .. the
only way to solve this would be to rename the include/net directory
in the kernel to something else. Say, linux-net or linux/net.

I'd love to hear if someone had a workaround for this.

Mike.

-- 
"Our vision is to speed up time, eventually eliminating it." -- Alex Schure


-
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/