| 1 |
On Tue, 2003-10-21 at 19:44, C. Brewer wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> The only modules discussion so far, other than what you recently brought up, |
| 4 |
> was Mike's example of how the nvidia-modules package determined the running |
| 5 |
> kernel. The original question was how does a package(generic) determine the |
| 6 |
> running kernel. While I agree that there are some issues with the modules |
| 7 |
> packages that should be handled differently, no package that doesn't provide |
| 8 |
> modules should care what kernel you're running. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
IMHO, the original question was 'asked incorreclty'. Or then out of a |
| 11 |
Gentoo point of view. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
We generally do not care what kernel is running - sure, we do wonder |
| 14 |
what ARCH we running on, but then that we usually set in make.conf :/ |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
For our purpose, we care about the target kernel - ie, what kernel |
| 17 |
should we compile this module for, or (and this might be related to |
| 18 |
some other comments from you) what kernel should we use for this |
| 19 |
broken user-space program that need kernel headers, and not the |
| 20 |
generics in /usr/include. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Sure, Linus might not agree with /usr/src/linux, but then it is |
| 23 |
known, and as far as I know there is no problems (except your |
| 24 |
usual problems which is package specific and would be broken |
| 25 |
anyhow if not current headers was there). |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Hope I was not too confusing :) |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Thanks, |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Martin Schlemmer |
| 35 |
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer |
| 36 |
Cape Town, South Africa |
Archives