- From: Frank Mori Hess <fmhess_at_users.sourceforge.net>
- Date: Tue, 1 Jun 2004 22:25:36 -0400
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 01 June 2004 04:07 am, comedi_at_scil.sinp.msu.ru wrote: > On Mon, 31 May 2004, Frank Mori Hess wrote: > > > > It seems inevitable to me, as the kernel's build process for modules > > has become so complex and fragile. > > But, it is the real life. > We have new computers, with new chipsets and processors. New disks of > high capacity. New kernel with many features, that are faster, more > stable etc. Note: new kbuild for side user is simple. And is active for > a long time (V4L2 project is an example). You don't seem to understand the meaning of inevitable. > > OK, thanx. > But, maybe, the idea to make include files with names equal to the > native kernel includes is not so good? Some reorganization in these > sphere will not be so terrible. > You are entirely missing the point of why the compatibility header files exist. They are supposed to have the same names as the native kernel includes. - -- Frank -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFAvTqg5vihyNWuA4URAhrvAKDGGjUVDPUBaliMt++Gn5z+RsmQDACgt57O 1XyEaN9JVFywIMOorVQNz7A= =jOs4 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on 2004-06-02Z01:25:36