Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 15:34:13 +1000 (EST) From: Bruce Evans <bde@zeta.org.au> To: Marcel Moolenaar <marcel@xcllnt.net> Cc: Matthew Jacob <mjacob@feral.com>, <audit@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: change to linux/Makefile Message-ID: <20011015152623.K71511-100000@delplex.bde.org> In-Reply-To: <20011014221719.A528@dhcp01.pn.xcllnt.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 14 Oct 2001, Marcel Moolenaar wrote: > On Sun, Oct 14, 2001 at 09:00:11PM -0700, Matthew Jacob wrote: > > > > The first problem was that there was no linux_syscall anyway. The second > > problem was that even when I regen'd them for -stable, the compile wasn't > > finding them. > > linux_syscall.h, linux_proto.h and linux_sysent.c will be generated on > the fly when you do a make depend. Did you do a make depend? In RELENG_4, linux_proto.h is generated at commit time for i386's only. For alphas, the generated linux_proto.h is included using a confusing pathname (<linux_proto.h>; should be "linux_proto.h"). <>-style includes are logically relative to the top of the sys tree and ""-style includes are logically relative to the compile directory. Unfortunately, -I- makes <>-style includes physically equivalent to ""-style includes. > > > BTW- I'm not 100% convinced that similar problems are avoided in -current- by > > my having both a /usr/src on all of my machines as well as a /tstsys I > > probably get lots of unintentional 'sorta maybe kind mostly works' situations. > > On -current I reverted the generation-on-the-fly of the abovementioned > files, because we are missing the support in general for that. That's > probably why it works on -current. Bruce To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-audit" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011015152623.K71511-100000>