On 05/20/2015 03:39 AM, Grumbach, Emmanuel wrote:
On Wed, 2015-05-20 at 10:34 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Wed, 2015-05-20 at 08:31 +0000, Grumbach, Emmanuel wrote:
On Wed, 2015-05-20 at 10:27 +0200, Johannes Berg wrote:
On Tue, 2015-05-19 at 16:42 +0300, Emmanuel Grumbach wrote:
+#if (LINUX_VERSION_CODE == KERNEL_VERSION(3,13,11) && UTS_UBUNTU_RELEASE_ABI <
24)
Now that I look at this again, I'm confused - shouldn't this whole thing
have a ! in front?
why?
I need this definition only for Ubuntu releases that are below 24.
Canonical ported that starting 24.
What am I missing?
But every mainline kernel, say 3.10, also needs it. Also Ubuntu with
3.10, for example.
You are right obviously.
What happens if the user is not running a Ubuntu kernel and
UTS_UBUNTU_RELEASE_ABI is undefined?
I am really pissed off about Ubuntu's backporting API changes so that testing
LINUX_VERSION_CODE is no longer sufficient. In fact when someone complains the
one of the out-of-kernel drivers that I maintain does not build with kernel X.Y,
I check that version out in mainline, build the driver to make sure the problem
is not mine, and then tell them to complain to their vendor. I no longer fix
those problems. I think RHEL is also doing the same kind of thing - at least I
did get one complaint about a build problem that seemed to be due to an API
backport. Where do we stop?
Larry
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe backports" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
