Re: [RFC][PATCH] fail kernel compilation in case of unresolved symbols

[Adrian Bunk <bunk@stusta.de>]

On Wed, Sep 06, 2006 at 07:05:51PM +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote:
> Adrian Bunk wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 05:31:59PM +0200, Sam Ravnborg wrote:
> >
> >>On Tue, Sep 05, 2006 at 05:47:25PM +0400, Kirill Korotaev wrote:
> >>
> >>>At stage 2 modpost utility is used to check modules.
> >>>In case of unresolved symbols modpost only prints warning.
> >>>
> >>>IMHO it is a good idea to fail compilation process in case of
> >>>unresolved symbols, since usually such errors are left unnoticed,
> >>>but kernel modules are broken.
> >>
> >>The primary reason why we do not fail in this case is that building
> >>external modules often result in unresolved symbols at modpost time.
> >>
> >>And there is many legitime uses of external modules that we shall support.
> 
> >Is there a way we can get this only for building the kernel itself?

s/kernel itself/modules shipped with the kernel/

> >In this case an unresolved symbol is a real bug that should cause an 
> >abort of the compilation.
> IMHO for kernel linking will fail...
> 
> Don't you consider the kernel to be broken if suddenly one of your modules
> began to have unresolved symbols?
>...

> Thanks,
> Kirill

cu
Adrian

-- 

       "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out
        of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days.
       "Only a promise," Lao Er said.
                                       Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed