Ken Moffat wrote: > On Sun, May 07, 2006 at 11:08:15AM -0700, Jim Gifford wrote: > >> Ken, I found the problem it was a typo in the script, try this patch >> before I comm it it. http://ftp.jg555.com/headers/headers-00.60.diff >> > > Jim, > > Two problems with this: First, including linux/mod_devicetable.h > was what caused the build to fail. > > I looked at it, and didn't see anything that looked like > userspace to me. Mariusz didn't have it, and I think I checked for > other users without finding any, so I pruned it out and compiled. > > I must admit, I didn't remove mod_devicetable.h, but I think > anything trying to include it is likely to choke. > > Second, linux/pci_regs.h defines all the PCI registers and might be > needed in userspace. Certainly, Mariusz copied it into linux/pci.h > rather than having it as a separate file. > > I don't (at the moment) have strong feelings about linux/pci_ids.h > which you are reinstating as available for inclusion, but it seemed > to me that anything likely to want these details (e.g. external > modules) would include the file directly rather than through the > inclusion of pci.h (and again, that matches Mariusz's treatment). > > Just in case anybody thinks I'm writing a tribute to Mariusz's > headers, I'll point out that we were using them for some months, and > the only recent problem was with inotify. So, if his old headers > were adequate for what people build after {c,}lfs then taking the > same approach about which files to include is unlikely to harm our > users. > > Ken > Ken, mod_devicetable.h is needed by the other architectures. I'll do a comparison of the pci files versus llh and see what's up.
_______________________________________________ Clfs-dev mailing list [email protected] http://ninja.linux-phreak.biz/mailman/listinfo/clfs-dev
