* what's the right way to do this in 2.6?
@ 2006-03-24 23:40 evt
2006-03-25 7:05 ` Sam Ravnborg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: evt @ 2006-03-24 23:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
I have two modules that need to share a common utility library. What I'd like to do is make the library into a .a and link each module to it. 'Twould be also nice if the modules had a dependency so the library got built automatically. Thanks for any advice.
- Eric van Tassell
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
* Re: what's the right way to do this in 2.6?
2006-03-24 23:40 what's the right way to do this in 2.6? evt
@ 2006-03-25 7:05 ` Sam Ravnborg
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Sam Ravnborg @ 2006-03-25 7:05 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: evt; +Cc: linux-kernel
On Fri, Mar 24, 2006 at 11:40:08PM +0000, evt@texelsoft.com wrote:
> I have two modules that need to share a common utility library. What
> I'd like to do is make the library into a .a and link each module to it.
> 'Twould be also nice if the modules had a dependency so the library
> got built automatically. Thanks for any advice.
Drop the library idea and create a third module.
That's how this is done in several places in the kernel with success.
See Documentation/kbuild/* for how to deal with more than one module.
Sam
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-03-25 7:06 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2006-03-24 23:40 what's the right way to do this in 2.6? evt
2006-03-25 7:05 ` Sam Ravnborg
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
Powered by JetHome