Re: [PATCH 0/2] kbuild updates

[Martin Schlemmer <azarah@nosferatu.za.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1709 bytes --]

On Sun, 2004-06-20 at 23:19, Sam Ravnborg wrote:

Hiya,

> 2) Improved support for external modules.
>    It has been debated what to name the symlink in /lib/modules/`uname -r`
>    and where it should point.
>    Now that there is a possibility to build the kernel with a separate output
>    directory, there is a need to utilise this in the install.
>    From now on build will point to the output directory, and source will point
>    to the kernel source.

I know Sam's mta blocks my mail at least (lame isp), but for the rest,
please reconsider using this.  Many external modules, libs, etc use
/lib/modules/`uname -r`/build to locate the _source_, and this will
break them all.

Once again I do not argue the logic behind this, but please then rather
do it in 2.7, or just keep 'build', and make the output one 'output' or
'object' or something.

>  No effort whatsoever will be done to keep external modules working if
>  they do not use the kbuild infrastructure. There is no reason not to
>  do so.

Given, but to 'use' the kbuild infrastructure, you must still call it
via:

  make -C _path_to_sources M=`pwd`

and any external project that at least tries to automate things a bit
(because some things are not always distributed with vendor distro,
 or updated regularly by vendor distro, and most users know at least
 how to do 'make && make install') will break.

Lastly, if the 'build'/whatever symlinks is not an 'kbuild'
infrastructure (as Sam want to make it, and thus base his reasoning why
it is Ok to build it) for finding the source of the current running
kernel, then what is, why have it in the first place?


Thanks,

-- 
Martin Schlemmer

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]