Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs

From: Kai Henningsen (kaih@khms.westfalen.de)
Date: Mon Jul 31 2000 - 10:26:00 EST

Next message: Jeroen Geusebroek: "kupdate, high CPU usage"
Previous message: Kai Henningsen: "Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs"
In reply to: David Howells: "Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs"
Next in thread: Chris Meadors: "Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

David.Howells@nexor.co.uk (David Howells) wrote on 28.07.00 in <20000728112353Z160228-16385+645@vger.rutgers.edu>:

> Why not /usr/modules or /usr/kernel for the stuff required to compile
> modules (in other words stuff that the kernel doesn't actually use), for
> example:

I notice just about everybody suggesting absolute paths.

Try relative paths or environment variables instead. This has the
advantage of working anywhere you damn well please.

MfG Kai

-
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/

Next message: Jeroen Geusebroek: "kupdate, high CPU usage"
Previous message: Kai Henningsen: "Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs"
In reply to: David Howells: "Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs"
Next in thread: Chris Meadors: "Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jul 31 2000 - 21:00:33 EST