kernel-source vs. kernel-sourcecode (please revert)

[Arjan van de Ven]

> On Tue, Jun 15, 2004 at 12:16:50PM +0200, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
> > > There are probably lots of
> > > auto-build-some-3rd-party-kernel-module.sh scripts that do sanity
> > > checking and will now break.
> > 
> > those scripts then are very broken even in FC2 GA since you cannot
> > use kernel-source for building kernel modules in FC2.
> > (well not for modules against the currently running kernel, of
> > course you can build your own kernel with kernel source and then you
> > can use it to build modules against that kernel).
> 
> There are O(1000) kernel module rpms build upon that. The bugs in the
> kernel-source rpm prohibiting building against it are well known and
> dealt with:

these are ALL wrong then with the 2.6 kernel and with the 2.6 rpms. Really.
Removing custom and all those hacks are *WRONG*. Even on 2.4.
Any kernel module that does that is *BROKEN* build wise. Extremely broken.
You build your module against /lib/modules/`uname -r`/build.
Even in the 2.4 rpms you SHOULD NOT touch files in /usr/src/anything to
build an external module. If you do you prevent later builds of more correct
modules to work.

The kernel-doc documentation explains it for 2.6,
if your module is called foo.c you make a Makefile with
obj-m := foo.o
in it, and do
make -C /lib/modules/`uname -r`/build SUBDIRS=$PWD modules
to build your module.

In FC2 that uses ZERO files from kernel-source (unlike FC1 where that was a
symlink into kernel-source).
Any other method WILL eventually result in non-working modules.

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20040615/310416c1/attachment.sig>