On Tue May 08 2001 at 05:16, John Summerfield wrote:
> > Tony Nugent <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > On Sun May 06 2001 at 21:48, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > > > Dan Kegel ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) said:
> > > > > 'make modules' in red hat 7.1 fails for me like this:
> > > > Did you remember to do 'make mrproper' before rebuilding?
> > > This is definitely an FAQ.
> > > Why isn't the kernel-source rpm distributed like that as its default
> > > state?
> > To facilitate compilation of modules on your own, without having to
> > build a kernel first.
> Sounds to me like you've got it the wrong way round. Lots of people want to build
> kernels, very few as far as I can see want to build just a module.
You'll be suprised. I can now accept that distributing the kernel
sources like that is a very good compromise, useful for doing
exactly that - building new kernel modules.
Personally I've had to do this now a few times... for example,
the newer bttv modules my voodoo3 card uses, and the vmware
driver modules. Having the sources installed from the rpm in
that state meant that the modules could be compiled right away
against the sources, no fuss at all.
> And the odds are you have built with the wrong configuration for an awful lot of
> folk. I'd guess that most don't want SMP or the "enterprise" kernel, but a few want
> one of those, and that the source tree is wrong for at least one of those groups.
>
> If I'm wrong, please describe how.
Perhaps the kernel Makefile could be patched so that "make
{menu,x,}config" or "make dep" (or whatever) will first do a sanity
check to see if the intention is to build a new kernel while in a
default post-configured state. It it is, a big loud warning is
issued that the source tree may need a "make mrproper" before going
any further. (Perhaps this is what the Makefile should do anyway?)
Cheers
Tony
_______________________________________________
Redhat-devel-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-devel-list
