Re: comedi-0.7.68

On Mon, Feb 23, 2004 at 08:40:40PM -0500, Frank Mori Hess wrote:
> Do you have an opinion regarding moving the module compilation to kbuild?  
> That is, doing a make in the kernel directory with SUBDIRS overridden (and 
> CC modified to include our compat headers first).  I've done it for the 
> linux-gpib kernel modules without problems.  It would probably mean 
> abandoning 2.2 and earlier kernel support though.  

This makes packaging very difficult.  A number of projects have
adopted modtool recently, since it interacts with autoconf/automake
well and also makes it really easy to build rpm and deb packages.
However, there's no reason why building as part of the kernel tree
couldn't be an option.

> The current build system still has a couple issues I'm aware of.  We don't 
> define KBUILD_BASENAME (not sure what problems it might cause, but 
> KBUILD_BASENAME is used in various asm kernel headers).  Also, the 
> vermagic.o file isn't linked into comedi modules, which causes them to 
> taint the 2.6 kernel (I believe vermagic.o is supposed to prevent people 
> from compiling the kernel and the modules with different versions of gcc).

modtool could (and should) easily be fixed to handle these problems.
I didn't realize the former, and I've ignored the latter.



dave...

Received on 2004-02-24Z01:52:35