Re: ANN: LKMB (Linux Kernel Module Builder) version 0.1.16

[Arjan van de Ven <arjanv@redhat.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1369 bytes --]

On Sat, 2003-01-18 at 23:37, Olaf Titz wrote:
> > > Use "/lib/modules/`uname -r`/build" as a default kernel directory, but
> > > allow it to be overridden somehow from the command line. Then do something
> > > like...
> >...
> > Do you mean I'll need a live Linux kernel to build the kernel module
> > package?
> 
> Whoever invented this /lib/modules/... scheme should have known that
> it provokes this sort of misunderstandings, not to mention is broken
> in other ways too.

it was Linus who decreed this to be the standard;)

> 
> You need the _source_ of the kernel the module will run on to compile
> modules. You don't need to _run_ this kernel while compiling. Putting
> build infrastructure into a deployment directory at the least causes
> confusion, not to mention that the deployment directory might not even
> exist on the development machine. (I routinely compile kernels and
> modules of different configurations for three boxes on one of them,
> the other two don't even have a complete development toolset.)

yes, and most of the time you want to compile against the currently
running kernel, at which point `uname -r` comes in handy; for other
kernels you just change the path a bit.
make install and make modules_install make the symlink right already....
it's a 99% solution, sure, but it's ok for all but a few cases.


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