Messages in this thread | | | From | "Ulrich Windl" <> | Date | Tue, 26 Jan 1999 08:02:21 +0100 | Subject | Re: /usr/include/linux vs. /usr/src/linux/include/linux |
| |
On 25 Jan 99, at 10:36, Michael Elizabeth Chastain wrote:
> Hi Ulrich, > > The distribution shouldn't have such a /usr/include/linux symlink at > all. > > Files for the target computer (most of the files) should not use any > files in /usr/include at all. You can almost build the kernel with > "-nostdinc", except that some files do #include <stdarg.h>, which lives > in a gcc-lib directory rather than /usr/include. If someone could handle > that issue, I think "-nostdinc" would be a good thing; it would catch > some dumb #include errors.
Michael,
you are right: I was unaware that <linux/something.h> used by kernel parts does not access /usr/include, but /usr/src/.../include.
> > Files to be built on the host, such as scripts/mkdep.c, are ordinary > userland C apps. They can also #include <linux/*.h> files to get at > structures definitions, but because of the "-I" flags, these will > get resolved out of /usr/src/linux/include with no need for a > symlink. > > Michael
Ulrich P.S. My apologies to the list
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |