From: Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com>
To: Keith Owens <kaos@ocs.com.au>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] cleanup KERNEL_VERSION definition and linux/version.h
Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 09:55:27 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <20020405175527.GK961@matchmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20020405020752.GJ961@matchmail.com> <3034.1017974559@kao2.melbourne.sgi.com>
> >On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 11:36:06AM +1000, Keith Owens wrote:
> >> No, but version.h is working at the moment in 2.4. Why change it?
> >
> On Thu, 4 Apr 2002 18:07:52 -0800,
> Mike Fedyk <mfedyk@matchmail.com> wrote:
> >Why do so many drivers enable options depending on the kernel version?
> >Shouldn't that be stripped out before a patch is accepted into the kernel?
>
On Fri, Apr 05, 2002 at 12:42:39PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote:
> >From kbuild 2.5 top level Makefile.
>
> # FIXME: Current kernel source includes linux/version.h, mainly to get
> # KERNEL_VERSION(). version.h also includes UTS_RELEASE which changes every
> # time the kernel identifiers change. The presence of UTS_RELEASE in version.h
> # causes lots of unnecessary recompilations, very few places actually want
> # UTS_RELEASE. The new makefile generates separate linux/version.h and
> # linux/uts_release.h, with version.h including utsname.h to avoid compilation
> # errors. Find all the source code that needs just UTS_RELEASE and change it to
> # include uts_release.h, then remove #include <linux/uts_release.h> from the
> # commands below. KAO
>
> Unfortunately this area of kbuild 2.4 is fragile. At the moment,
> changes to the top level Makefile indirectly force a rebuild,
> Makefile -> version.h -> KERNEL_VERSION() -> almost everything.
>
> Breaking that chain _might_ cause problems in 2.4 because it does not
> have a complete dependency chain to pick up changes to the top level
> Makefile, it only works at the moment due to the extra recompiles. I
> am not willing to change this in 2.4 until I have got it stable in 2.5.
Sounds like a good plan to work on 2.5 first.
Hmm. It looks like kbuild 2.5 might be able to be split up into a few
separate parts. Do you think so too?
Do you know where I could find some good documentation on Makefiles?
Especially on dependencies and etc?
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-04-05 17:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-04-03 14:49 [PATCH] cleanup KERNEL_VERSION definition and linux/version.h Hiroyuki Toda
2002-04-03 23:06 ` Keith Owens
2002-04-04 1:12 ` Hiroyuki Toda
2002-04-04 1:36 ` Keith Owens
2002-04-04 4:31 ` Hiroyuki Toda
2002-04-05 2:07 ` Mike Fedyk
2002-04-05 2:42 ` Keith Owens
2002-04-05 17:55 ` Mike Fedyk [this message]
2002-04-06 3:41 ` Keith Owens
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-04-06 16:23 Dan Kegel
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=20020405175527.GK961@matchmail.com \
--to=mfedyk@matchmail.com \
--cc=kaos@ocs.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.