Re: toplevel Makefile bug and simple fix

Tom Leete (tleete@access.mountain.net)
Mon, 08 Nov 1999 16:15:12 +0000


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.

Tom

-
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/