On Sun, 6 Nov 2005 14:00:13 +0100, Sven Luther <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> On Sun, Nov 06, 2005 at 12:39:52PM +0000, Martin Michlmayr wrote:
>> * Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-05 23:51]:
>> > Why should a symlink be ignored? What other stuff would
>> > people
>> > want to have ignored if we start on a slippery slope like this?
>> > nividia-source, vmware, and scads of others would like to dump
>> > stuff in /lib/modules, and the book keeping involved in keeping
>> > track of stuff in the /lib/modules/ which is OK to ignore would
>> > be massive.
>>
>> > The presence of that link is a bug, and should be fixed.
> Huh ? What is going on here, the /lib/modules/<foo>/build/ link is
> *NOT* a bug, and is part of the plan to build external modules, and
> thus needed and advertized so. Please *DON'T* even think about
> removing it.
Err, I never advertized any such thing. Can you explain to my
why the solution of kernel-headers installing scripts in
/etc/kernel/{postinst,prerm}.d would not work?
>> Can you explain why it is a bug? I think upstream puts header
>> files in /lib/modules/<foo>/build/ too, so it's not as if this is a
>> Debian specific thing. (Correct me if I'm wrong; also CCing
>> -kernel).
> Indeed, and most third party modules build out of the box checking
> for it and doing KSRC=/lib/modules/<foo>/build/.
All the tird party modules I have see use unanme -r to get the
version -- which means a kernel-image has already been installed, and
in that case, the /etc/kernel/postinst.d scripts have been run.
manoj
--
I know it's weird, but it does make it easier to write poetry in perl.
:-) --Larry Wall in <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <http://www.debian.org/%7Esrivasta/>
1024D/BF24424C print 4966 F272 D093 B493 410B 924B 21BA DABB BF24 424C
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
