On Sat, 16 Dec 2000, Peter Samuelson wrote:
>
> [ferret@phonewave.net]
> > Do you have an alternative reccomendation? I've shown where the
> > symlink method WILL fail. You disagree that having the configured
> > headers copied is a workable idea. What else is there?
>
> 4.5 more megabytes, per kernel, on my root filesystem. (That's *after*
> pruning the extra include/asm-*/'s.) Thanks but no thanks.
Yep. Did not occur to me at the time I asked. Someone else pointed this
out to me also. VERY good point, but still needed to be explicitely
mentioned.
> Symlinks fail only if you move or delete your tree. By doing that, you
> have proven that you actually know what and where your kernel sources
> are, which in turn is strong evidence that you are not in need of those
> "External Module Compiling for Dummies" scripts.
I have not moved or deleted a tree. I do not HAVE a kernel tree in the
first place. Therefore, nothing for the symlink to point to when I install
the kernel.
> Conversely, by actually trusting a random script to compile an external
> module unaided, the user is all but declaring himself incapable of
> messing around with the /usr/src/linux that came pre-installed.
You are assuming there is a /usr/src/linux that came pre-installed. This
is not a valid assumption.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat Dec 23 2000 - 21:00:18 EST