lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2000]   [Dec]   [16]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From


    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/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 12:52    [W:7.277 / U:0.028 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site