> On Sun, 27 Oct 1996, Philippe Troin wrote:
>
>
> Almost every kernel that have looked in (including 2.0.x) looks in
> /usr/include.
This is wrong.
>
> Anytime a file needs an include file it it referenced lise this:
>
> #include
>
> This is /usr/include/linux/whatever.h. It is assumed by
On Sun, 27 Oct 1996 12:52:32 CST [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Oct 1996, Philippe Troin wrote:
> > This is a long story and it generated a lot of discussions here.
> > The consensus is that it's better for user-level programs to be compiled
> > with the same set of kernel file than libc
On Sun, 27 Oct 1996, Philippe Troin wrote:
>
>
> This is a long story and it generated a lot of discussions here.
> The consensus is that it's better for user-level programs to be compiled with
> the same set of kernel file than libc was compiled with.
> Obviously, if you want to compile your
On Sun, 27 Oct 1996 17:38:12 +1100 Hamish Moffatt ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
rmit.EDU.AU) wrote:
> I mentioned previously that it's very difficult to compile modules
> and things on Debian because /usr/include/linux is from libc5-dev,
> and hence contains old version.h, and doesn't contain modversions.h.
I mentioned previously that it's very difficult to compile modules
and things on Debian because /usr/include/linux is from libc5-dev,
and hence contains old version.h, and doesn't contain modversions.h.
This problem is even worse in that you cannot compile kernel 2.1.5
on Debian; it looks for sever
5 matches
Mail list logo
