On Wed, Dec 17, 2003 at 01:04:15AM +0530, Rajkumar S wrote:
> While investigating a compilation problem of samhain, I found that the
> /usr/include/asm/mpspec.h is totally different from what is provided by
> RH or the stock kernel.
It's from the 2.6 kernel, but that shouldn&#x
Hi,
While investigating a compilation problem of samhain, I found that the
/usr/include/asm/mpspec.h is totally different from what is provided by
RH or the stock kernel. I am not knowledgeable enough to understand the
differences, but debian version includes 3 files in it
#include
#include
On Tue, 29 Jun 1999, Evan Van Dyke wrote:
> *SNIP*
> > However, I expect I'm the only one who thinks that's the proper
> > approach so, how's this for a solution: Give the /usr/include/asm and
> > /usr/include/linux directories up as lost causes. Instead,
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Jonathan Guthrie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Now, this is getting nonsensical. First, you tell me that the reason that
[rant deleted]
Why can't you simply use -I/usr/src/linux/include if you need those
specific kernel includes.
Mike.
--
Beware of Programmers who
Jonathan Guthrie wrote:
*SNIP*
> However, I expect I'm the only one who thinks that's the proper
> approach so, how's this for a solution: Give the /usr/include/asm and
> /usr/include/linux directories up as lost causes. Instead, define new
> directories. Say /usr/
/include/sys (which, as you say, are the bulk of the problem) have no
business referring to any files in /usr/include/linux or /usr/include/asm
unless they need things that can change if the kernel changes.
The proper approach would be to separate out the libc header stuff that's
truly system
>I would have thought that someone would have figured out by now that
>/usr/include/linux (at the very least) should reflect the status of the
>kernel so that kernel-specific stuff can be done and that NOTHING in the
>library or in the include files associated with that library should depend
>upon
9 at 11:24:55AM -0400, Paul D. Smith wrote:
> > > > I tried to install vmware over the weekend and it wanted to compile a
> > > > kernel module for my 2.2.10 kernel. It complained because my linux
> > > > kernel header version was still 2.2.9. I looked and su
> > > kernel module for my 2.2.10 kernel. It complained because my linux
> > > kernel header version was still 2.2.9. I looked and sure enough,
> > > /usr/include/linux and /usr/include/asm were both real directories with
> > > real files.
> > >
> >
a
> > kernel module for my 2.2.10 kernel. It complained because my linux
> > kernel header version was still 2.2.9. I looked and sure enough,
> > /usr/include/linux and /usr/include/asm were both real directories with
> > real files.
> >
> > Aren't these typi
Look in the archives here:
http://www.debian.org/Lists-Archives/debian-user-9702/msg00686.html
for a note from linus about why things are the way they are.
Carl
%% Bob Nielsen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
bn> In Debian, the headers in /usr/include/linux and /usr/include/asm are
bn> not symlinks to the kernel source, but are supplied by libc6-dev. As
bn> this is periodically upgraded, they may be based on newer kernels--the
bn&
de/linux and /usr/include/asm were both real directories with
> real files.
>
> Aren't these typically supposed to be symlinks to /usr/src/linux/...?
>
> Also, how did the headers there get up to 2.2.9? I haven't done
> anything fancy to copy headers into those directo
> > Also, how did the headers there get up to 2.2.9? I haven't done
> > anything fancy to copy headers into those directories, and I've been
> > downloading kernel patches from www.linuxhq.com etc, not the Debian
> > packages. Does the normal kernel build usually install these? I wonder
> > why
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Paul D. Smith) writes:
> I tried to install vmware over the weekend and it wanted to compile a
> kernel module for my 2.2.10 kernel. It complained because my linux
> kernel header version was still 2.2.9. I looked and sure enough,
> /usr/include/linux and /usr
I tried to install vmware over the weekend and it wanted to compile a
kernel module for my 2.2.10 kernel. It complained because my linux
kernel header version was still 2.2.9. I looked and sure enough,
/usr/include/linux and /usr/include/asm were both real directories with
real files.
Aren&#
Hi,
The canned response comes from the readme file included with
the kernel headers package. It has been gleaned from various
discussions on the Debian Lists, and from private email from David
Engel and Linus Torvalds.
I am given to understand that Linus will incorporate langua
Manoj Srivastava typed:
> Hi,
>
> I'll reverse the question: why are you using the links?
> The links are ignored anyway while compiling the kernel, so that's
> not it. However, you may totally confuse some other program (during
> compilation) that does not expect changes that are made in
> Hamish> Besides, the gcc manual page says: -I "Append directory
> =09Are you sure? Also the manual page warn to look at the info
> pages, as so:
True. Unfortunate (imho) that GNU cannot stick with the standard
documentation system, or extend it, rather than replacing it with
something that re
Hi,
>>"Hamish" == Hamish Moffatt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Hamish> Has anyone had any luck compiling (z)ftape 3.02 on debian,
Hamish> then? I've tried, but it (reasonably) requires current kernel
Hamish> headers, and despite adding the above to several Makefiles, it
Hamish> still does not look i
On Tue, 18 Feb 1997, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> > So, what else are the links good for? Most programs do not
> > (and should not) depend on kernel version specific api's; and the
> > handful that do should ask for and include -I/usr/src/linux anyway.
>
> Has anyone had any luck compiling (z)f
On Feb 18, Hamish Moffatt wrote
> > So, what else are the links good for? Most programs do not
> > (and should not) depend on kernel version specific api's; and the
> > handful that do should ask for and include -I/usr/src/linux anyway.
>
> Has anyone had any luck compiling (z)ftape 3.02 on
> So, what else are the links good for? Most programs do not
> (and should not) depend on kernel version specific api's; and the
> handful that do should ask for and include -I/usr/src/linux anyway.
Has anyone had any luck compiling (z)ftape 3.02 on debian, then?
I've tried, but it (reaso
Hi,
I'll reverse the question: why are you using the links?
The links are ignored anyway while compiling the kernel, so that's
not it. However, you may totally confuse some other program (during
compilation) that does not expect changes that are made in the kernel
includes. You see, ch
some software looks for /usr/include/asm, which doesn't exist, but
probably should as a symlink to asm-i386.
Just a minor bug report that's probably well known.
--Z
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] . Troub
25 matches
Mail list logo
