* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
[not found] ` <200007271531.KAA89926@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>
@ 2000-07-31 14:57 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-07-31 17:35 ` Richard B. Johnson
2000-08-02 18:16 ` peter swain
0 siblings, 2 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Kai Henningsen @ 2000-07-31 14:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil (Jesse Pollard) wrote on 27.07.00 in <200007271531.KAA89926@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>:
> Might I suggest creating a "/lib/include" that works something like
> the /lib/modules where the kernel name is used to generate the directory
> for the kernel include files?
>
> That way the "uname -r" command could be used to set a symbolic link
> to point to the correct include files at boot time (or install time).
Correct for what?
I think this is silly.
There are two versions of header files people tend to be interested in:
a. The ones corresponding to the libc version their linker will link
against. This will be good for 99% of the situations.
b. A special version for some kernel-version-dependant executable. Exact
version depends on what they plan to do with that executable - could be
most advanced kernel version available, least advanced version available,
a specific version whose significance depends on the configuration of a
different machine, whatever.
There is no reason to assume that the currently running kernel version is
any more relevant than any of the other arguments for b.
> This way the kernel that is active would be selecting the correct includes.
Correct for what?
MfG Kai
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-07-31 14:57 ` RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs Kai Henningsen
@ 2000-07-31 17:35 ` Richard B. Johnson
2000-07-31 20:06 ` Mike Galbraith
2000-07-31 21:15 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-08-02 18:16 ` peter swain
1 sibling, 2 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Richard B. Johnson @ 2000-07-31 17:35 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kai Henningsen; +Cc: linux-kernel
On 31 Jul 2000, Kai Henningsen wrote:
> pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil (Jesse Pollard) wrote on 27.07.00 in <200007271531.KAA89926@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>:
>
> > Might I suggest creating a "/lib/include" that works something like
> > the /lib/modules where the kernel name is used to generate the directory
> > for the kernel include files?
> >
> > That way the "uname -r" command could be used to set a symbolic link
> > to point to the correct include files at boot time (or install time).
>
> Correct for what?
>
I must be able to build kernel modules for a kernel version that I
am not yet running. This is not related in any way to what I get from
`uname -r`. Further, I may be building the kernel for an Alpha on
an Intel machine, using a cross-compiler.
The de-facto standard has been that /usr/src/linux is a sym-link to
the kernel version you wish to build. Why is this expected to be
changed?
Since this is a symbolic link, it can cross device boundaries. This
makes it very versatile.
/usr/include/linux and /usr/include/asm are symbolic links, referenced
to /usr/src/linux, not a specific version. This makes changing kernel
development versions a simple change of a single symbolic link.
Why would anybody change this? I fear that this is another of those;
"It doesn't have to be better, only different..." things that have
been going around.
Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin: Linux version 2.2.15 on an i686 machine (797.90 BogoMips).
"Memory is like gasoline. You use it up when you are running. Of
course you get it all back when you reboot..."; Actual explanation
obtained from the Micro$oft help desk.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-07-31 17:35 ` Richard B. Johnson
@ 2000-07-31 20:06 ` Mike Galbraith
2000-07-31 21:15 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
1 sibling, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Mike Galbraith @ 2000-07-31 20:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Richard B. Johnson; +Cc: Kai Henningsen, linux-kernel
On Mon, 31 Jul 2000, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> On 31 Jul 2000, Kai Henningsen wrote:
>
> > pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil (Jesse Pollard) wrote on 27.07.00 in <200007271531.KAA89926@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>:
> >
> > > Might I suggest creating a "/lib/include" that works something like
> > > the /lib/modules where the kernel name is used to generate the directory
> > > for the kernel include files?
> > >
> > > That way the "uname -r" command could be used to set a symbolic link
> > > to point to the correct include files at boot time (or install time).
> >
> > Correct for what?
> >
<snip>
> Why would anybody change this? I fear that this is another of those;
> "It doesn't have to be better, only different..." things that have
> been going around.
Well, I suspect that there is an issue for driver authors/maintainers,
but haven't figured out quite what that issue is. Why does it matter?
I really couldn't care less where headers officially live.. as long as
it's possiblle [preferably easy] to maintain them where _I_ want them.
(and that is nowhere near /)
-Mike
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-07-31 17:35 ` Richard B. Johnson
2000-07-31 20:06 ` Mike Galbraith
@ 2000-07-31 21:15 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-07-31 21:49 ` Richard B. Johnson
` (2 more replies)
1 sibling, 3 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Miquel van Smoorenburg @ 2000-07-31 21:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
In article >Pine.LNX.3.95.1000731132321.529A-100000@chaos.analogic.com>,
Richard B. Johnson <root@chaos.analogic.com> wrote:
> /usr/include/linux and /usr/include/asm are symbolic links, referenced
>to /usr/src/linux, not a specific version. This makes changing kernel
>development versions a simple change of a single symbolic link.
No. Even Linus himself has been saying for years (and recently even
in this thread) that /usr/include/linux and /usr/include/asm should
NOT EVER be symlinks to /usr/src/linux
Everything in /usr/include belongs to and depends on glibc, not
the currently running kernel.
And if you want to compile modules and use /usr/include/linux for
the include files, what are you going to do about networking
modules that use include/net ? The one in the kernel source is
very, very different from the one in glibc .. so you have to compile
with -I/path/to/kernel/include _anyway_
You can't just use /usr/src/linux/include, what if you want to compile
against another kernel version? What if you are not root ?
The /lib/modules/version/ stuff is a good idea, but it should
contain a `kernel-config' script that outputs the complete CFLAGS
that the kernel was compiled with. Easy, simple, enduser friendly.
Mike.
--
Cistron Certified Internetwork Expert #1. Think free speech; drink free beer.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-07-31 21:15 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
@ 2000-07-31 21:49 ` Richard B. Johnson
2000-07-31 22:39 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-07-31 22:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-08-01 2:11 ` Mike Castle
2 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Richard B. Johnson @ 2000-07-31 21:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Miquel van Smoorenburg; +Cc: linux-kernel
On 31 Jul 2000, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> In article >Pine.LNX.3.95.1000731132321.529A-100000@chaos.analogic.com>,
> Richard B. Johnson <root@chaos.analogic.com> wrote:
> > /usr/include/linux and /usr/include/asm are symbolic links, referenced
> >to /usr/src/linux, not a specific version. This makes changing kernel
> >development versions a simple change of a single symbolic link.
>
> No. Even Linus himself has been saying for years (and recently even
> in this thread) that /usr/include/linux and /usr/include/asm should
> NOT EVER be symlinks to /usr/src/linux
>
I don't think Linus said that at all. In fact, the first trees that
Linus made and distributed were done this way and have become the
de-facto standard as a result of this.
> Everything in /usr/include belongs to and depends on glibc, not
> the currently running kernel.
>
No. I have /usr/include/subdirectories which contain headers for X11, some
that contain headers for Motif, some that contain headers for pthreads,
bind-4.9.3, etc. These are not glibc headers.
You cannot decide that I can't keep these where they are.
Any portable code is not supposed to include non-portable headers.
This means that if your code does:
#include <linux/something.h>
it is not portable. If your portable code is written properly, the
presence of links to non-portable headers in /usr/include does nothing.
They are never referenced.
When you need to have current kernel headers referenced, your non-
portable code (like modules) specifically includes the linux headers.
This is now it's been done. I see no reason to change it.
> And if you want to compile modules and use /usr/include/linux for
> the include files, what are you going to do about networking
> modules that use include/net ? The one in the kernel source is
> very, very different from the one in glibc .. so you have to compile
> with -I/path/to/kernel/include _anyway_
>
> You can't just use /usr/src/linux/include, what if you want to compile
> against another kernel version? What if you are not root ?
>
We don't use /usr/src/linux/include. As stated, the include files
are referenced from /usr/include.
> The /lib/modules/version/ stuff is a good idea, but it should
> contain a `kernel-config' script that outputs the complete CFLAGS
> that the kernel was compiled with. Easy, simple, enduser friendly.
>
Cheers,
Dick Johnson
Penguin: Linux version 2.2.15 on an i686 machine (797.90 BogoMips).
"Memory is like gasoline. You use it up when you are running. Of
course you get it all back when you reboot..."; Actual explanation
obtained from the Micro$oft help desk.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-07-31 21:49 ` Richard B. Johnson
@ 2000-07-31 22:39 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Miquel van Smoorenburg @ 2000-07-31 22:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
In article >Pine.LNX.3.95.1000731173215.4111A-100000@chaos.analogic.com>,
Richard B. Johnson <root@chaos.analogic.com> wrote:
>On 31 Jul 2000, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
>> No. Even Linus himself has been saying for years (and recently even
>> in this thread) that /usr/include/linux and /usr/include/asm should
>> NOT EVER be symlinks to /usr/src/linux
>
>I don't think Linus said that at all.
That is the problem. Linus has been saying that for years, but
as I said, for some reason people refuse to listen. You're proving
my point.
>In fact, the first trees that
>Linus made and distributed were done this way and have become the
>de-facto standard as a result of this.
Read <8lop07$2ee$1@penguin.transmeta.com> in which Linus says:
>/usr/include/asm is a symlink to /usr/src/linux/include/asm, as in the
>original distribution but /usr/src/linux is a 2.4.0-testX tree.
>With a 2.2.X source tree, it does not produce any warning.
I've asked glibc maintainers to stop the symlink insanity for the last
few years now, but it doesn't seem to happen.
Basically, that symlink should not be a symlink. It's a symlink for
historical reasons, none of them very good any more (and haven't been
for a long time), and it's a disaster unless you want to be a C library
developer. Which not very many people want to be.
The fact is, that the header files should match the library you link
against, not the kernel you run on.
Also read <Pine.LNX.4.10.10007270728480.2768-100000@penguin.transmeta.com>
for more enlightenment. If you want to join a thread, please make sure
that you have read all messages in it.
Mike.
--
Cistron Certified Internetwork Expert #1. Think free speech; drink free beer.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-07-31 21:15 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-07-31 21:49 ` Richard B. Johnson
@ 2000-07-31 22:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-07-31 22:33 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-08-01 2:18 ` Mike Castle
2000-08-01 2:11 ` Mike Castle
2 siblings, 2 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: H. Peter Anvin @ 2000-07-31 22:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Followup to: <8m4q9v$871$1@enterprise.cistron.net>
By author: miquels@cistron.nl (Miquel van Smoorenburg)
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> No. Even Linus himself has been saying for years (and recently even
> in this thread) that /usr/include/linux and /usr/include/asm should
> NOT EVER be symlinks to /usr/src/linux
>
> Everything in /usr/include belongs to and depends on glibc, not
> the currently running kernel.
>
Unfortunately that doesn't work very well. For user-space daemons
which talk to Linux-specific kernel interfaces, such as automount, you
need both the glibc and the Linux kernel headers.
-hpa
--
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-07-31 22:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
@ 2000-07-31 22:33 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-08-01 0:17 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-08-01 2:18 ` Mike Castle
1 sibling, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Miquel van Smoorenburg @ 2000-07-31 22:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
In article >8m4tn3$cri$1@cesium.transmeta.com>,
H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>Followup to: <8m4q9v$871$1@enterprise.cistron.net>
>By author: miquels@cistron.nl (Miquel van Smoorenburg)
>In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>>
>> No. Even Linus himself has been saying for years (and recently even
>> in this thread) that /usr/include/linux and /usr/include/asm should
>> NOT EVER be symlinks to /usr/src/linux
>>
>> Everything in /usr/include belongs to and depends on glibc, not
>> the currently running kernel.
>
>Unfortunately that doesn't work very well. For user-space daemons
>which talk to Linux-specific kernel interfaces, such as automount, you
>need both the glibc and the Linux kernel headers.
Yes, but you can't mix&match anyway. For stuff like that you're
probably best off by using a talktokernel.c file that is
compiled with -I/path/to/kernel/include while the rest of the
daemon doesn't know about kernel internals.
That could and perhaps should be fixed, but I think that is
a different issue entirely.
Mike.
--
Cistron Certified Internetwork Expert #1. Think free speech; drink free beer.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-07-31 22:33 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
@ 2000-08-01 0:17 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-08-01 0:43 ` wingel
2000-08-01 9:36 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
0 siblings, 2 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: H. Peter Anvin @ 2000-08-01 0:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Followup to: <8m4uri$d9e$1@enterprise.cistron.net>
By author: miquels@cistron.nl (Miquel van Smoorenburg)
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> >> Everything in /usr/include belongs to and depends on glibc, not
> >> the currently running kernel.
> >
> >Unfortunately that doesn't work very well. For user-space daemons
> >which talk to Linux-specific kernel interfaces, such as automount, you
> >need both the glibc and the Linux kernel headers.
>
> Yes, but you can't mix&match anyway. For stuff like that you're
> probably best off by using a talktokernel.c file that is
> compiled with -I/path/to/kernel/include while the rest of the
> daemon doesn't know about kernel internals.
>
> That could and perhaps should be fixed, but I think that is
> a different issue entirely.
>
For most kernel interface daemons, that is not an option. You need to
be able to translate (or just transfer information) between
glibc-provided and kernel-provided data structures, so you need to be
able to include all the datatypes.
Let's get this straight: #include <linux/*> and #include <asm/*> are
*expected* to be the kernel headers. This is a completely different
issue from the fact that glibc headers shouldn't #include these
headers like libc5 did.
-hpa
--
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-01 0:17 ` H. Peter Anvin
@ 2000-08-01 0:43 ` wingel
2000-08-01 1:00 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-08-01 9:36 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
1 sibling, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: wingel @ 2000-08-01 0:43 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: hpa; +Cc: linux-kernel
In article <8m54u3$dh0$1@cesium.transmeta.com> you hpa@zytor.com wrote:
>Let's get this straight: #include <linux/*> and #include <asm/*> are
>*expected* to be the kernel headers. This is a completely different
>issue from the fact that glibc headers shouldn't #include these
>headers like libc5 did.
And IMHO to be able to do this, one should have to provide an explicit
-I/usr/src/my-kernel/linux/include, it should not be the default.
/Christer
--
"Just how much can I get away with and still go to heaven?"
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-01 0:43 ` wingel
@ 2000-08-01 1:00 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-08-01 2:06 ` wingel
0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: H. Peter Anvin @ 2000-08-01 1:00 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: wingel; +Cc: hpa, linux-kernel
wingel@t1.ctrl-c.liu.se wrote:
>
> In article <8m54u3$dh0$1@cesium.transmeta.com> you hpa@zytor.com wrote:
> >Let's get this straight: #include <linux/*> and #include <asm/*> are
> >*expected* to be the kernel headers. This is a completely different
> >issue from the fact that glibc headers shouldn't #include these
> >headers like libc5 did.
>
> And IMHO to be able to do this, one should have to provide an explicit
> -I/usr/src/my-kernel/linux/include, it should not be the default.
>
I disagree. It makes life far too painful for the end user, for really no gain.
-hpa
--
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-01 1:00 ` H. Peter Anvin
@ 2000-08-01 2:06 ` wingel
0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: wingel @ 2000-08-01 2:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: hpa; +Cc: linux-kernel
In article <3986213D.FBACB4D1@transmeta.com> you hpg@transmeta.com writes:
>wingel@t1.ctrl-c.liu.se wrote:
>> And IMHO to be able to do this, one should have to provide an explicit
>> -I/usr/src/my-kernel/linux/include, it should not be the default.
>
>I disagree. It makes life far too painful for the end user, for really no gain.
The idea was to make a point, that #include <linux/xxx.h> really is
a kernel/kernel aware application thing only. It ought to reduce the
number of people who try to include kernel only stuff without knowing
that it is a nono most of the time.
It isn't all that hard to add the following lines to the Makefiles
for an application that needs the kernel includes:
KERNELDIR=/usr/src/linux
CFLAGS+=$(KERNELDIR)/include
And then standardise on /usr/src/linux as the directory where the kernel
includes for the current kernel reside on a distribution. Those who
compile multiple kernels on the same system should be savvy enough to
do "KERNELDIR=/usr/src/my-kernel/linux make" or modify the Makefile.
/Christer
--
"Just how much can I get away with and still go to heaven?"
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-01 0:17 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-08-01 0:43 ` wingel
@ 2000-08-01 9:36 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-08-01 17:03 ` H. Peter Anvin
1 sibling, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Miquel van Smoorenburg @ 2000-08-01 9:36 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
In article >8m54u3$dh0$1@cesium.transmeta.com>,
H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>Followup to: <8m4uri$d9e$1@enterprise.cistron.net>
>By author: miquels@cistron.nl (Miquel van Smoorenburg)
>In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>>
>> >> Everything in /usr/include belongs to and depends on glibc, not
>> >> the currently running kernel.
>> >
>> >Unfortunately that doesn't work very well. For user-space daemons
>> >which talk to Linux-specific kernel interfaces, such as automount, you
>> >need both the glibc and the Linux kernel headers.
>>
>> Yes, but you can't mix&match anyway. For stuff like that you're
>> probably best off by using a talktokernel.c file that is
>> compiled with -I/path/to/kernel/include while the rest of the
>> daemon doesn't know about kernel internals.
>>
>> That could and perhaps should be fixed, but I think that is
>> a different issue entirely.
>
>For most kernel interface daemons, that is not an option. You need to
>be able to translate (or just transfer information) between
>glibc-provided and kernel-provided data structures, so you need to be
>able to include all the datatypes.
Why? As I said you can use a glue layer. Note that you still
cannot mix /usr/include/net and /usr/src/linux/include/net anyway,
so clashes will always exist with the current system.
I agree it should probably be fixed.
>Let's get this straight: #include <linux/*> and #include <asm/*> are
>*expected* to be the kernel headers. This is a completely different
>issue from the fact that glibc headers shouldn't #include these
>headers like libc5 did.
But again as I said that is a different issue. This thread (with the
misleading Subject: header) is mostly about how to build modules
correctly.
There are 3 different issues here:
1. Consistent build environment for 3rd party modules
2. kernel-provided data structures for system daemons like autofs
3. kernel-provided data structures being used in glibc headers
I was merely talking about #1
Mike.
--
Cistron Certified Internetwork Expert #1. Think free speech; drink free beer.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-01 9:36 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
@ 2000-08-01 17:03 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-08-01 21:50 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: H. Peter Anvin @ 2000-08-01 17:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Followup to: <8m65np$mm3$1@enterprise.cistron.net>
By author: miquels@cistron.nl (Miquel van Smoorenburg)
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> Why? As I said you can use a glue layer. Note that you still
> cannot mix /usr/include/net and /usr/src/linux/include/net anyway,
> so clashes will always exist with the current system.
> I agree it should probably be fixed.
>
A GLUE LAYER IS FREQUENTLY NOT AN OPTION, because you have no data
types to carry around the semantic contents in. You really *DO* need
to mix both types.
-hpa
--
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-01 17:03 ` H. Peter Anvin
@ 2000-08-01 21:50 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Miquel van Smoorenburg @ 2000-08-01 21:50 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
In article >8m6vsk$er6$1@cesium.transmeta.com>,
H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>Followup to: <8m65np$mm3$1@enterprise.cistron.net>
>By author: miquels@cistron.nl (Miquel van Smoorenburg)
>In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>>
>> Why? As I said you can use a glue layer. Note that you still
>> cannot mix /usr/include/net and /usr/src/linux/include/net anyway,
>> so clashes will always exist with the current system.
>> I agree it should probably be fixed.
>
>A GLUE LAYER IS FREQUENTLY NOT AN OPTION,
No need to shout, I did say I agreed with you ;)
>because you have no data
>types to carry around the semantic contents in. You really *DO* need
>to mix both types.
Yes. So it should be fixed, right? Perhaps in 2.5 then we should
look into:
- moving kernel headers around: linux/include now contains
o linux
o asm
o net
o scsi
o video
To make sure we _can_ use libc headers and kernel headers we must
eliminate clashes. linux/include/net isn't the same as /usr/include/net,
same goes for /usr/include/scsi etc. So it's probably best to move
everything one level to:
o linux/kernel/*.h (this was most of linux/*.h)
o linux/public/*.h (contains public interfaces to the kernel)
o linux/asm/*.h
o linux/net/*.h
o linux/scsi/*.h
o linux/video/*.h
Hmm, perhaps that is not nessecary. If we're going to have a
linux/public hierarchy, you wouldn't need the rest of the
headers anyway, so they don't need to be moved. Cool ;)
- We need a script in /lib/modules/version/kernel-config that prints
the CFLAGS used to compile that kernel on stdout to compile modules.
Now, I think that all of this has been mentioned before on this
list, those are not completely my ideas. Somebody mentioned marking
structures/defines/etc that need to be exported with a special
comment so that a script could generate a set of headers with the
public interfaces. That is about the same as the public/ idea,
and perhaps a bit easier, since it wouldn't annoy the hell out
of all those device driver writers that see the interface change again..
Mike.
--
Cistron Certified Internetwork Expert #1. Think free speech; drink free beer.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-07-31 22:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-07-31 22:33 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
@ 2000-08-01 2:18 ` Mike Castle
2000-08-01 2:30 ` wingel
2000-08-01 17:03 ` H. Peter Anvin
1 sibling, 2 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Mike Castle @ 2000-08-01 2:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 03:13:55PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Unfortunately that doesn't work very well. For user-space daemons
> which talk to Linux-specific kernel interfaces, such as automount, you
> need both the glibc and the Linux kernel headers.
Does this mean that automount has to be rebuilt for every kernel? And that
we should be running /lib/modules/`uname -r`/sbin/automount.
It's sounds like it's an awful lot like a loadable module in how tightly
it's tied to the kernel. And how a kernel change can break things
horribly. How you have to be built against the one you're going to run
against and not the one glibc was built against.
mrc
--
Mike Castle Life is like a clock: You can work constantly
dalgoda@ix.netcom.com and be right all the time, or not work at all
www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/ and be right at least twice a day. -- mrc
We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-01 2:18 ` Mike Castle
@ 2000-08-01 2:30 ` wingel
2000-08-01 23:55 ` Mike Castle
2000-08-01 17:03 ` H. Peter Anvin
1 sibling, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: wingel @ 2000-08-01 2:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: dalgoda; +Cc: linux-kernel
In article <20000731211810.B28169@thune.mrc-home.org> dalgoda@ix.netcom.com wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 03:13:55PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
>> Unfortunately that doesn't work very well. For user-space daemons
>> which talk to Linux-specific kernel interfaces, such as automount, you
>> need both the glibc and the Linux kernel headers.
>
>Does this mean that automount has to be rebuilt for every kernel? And that
>we should be running /lib/modules/`uname -r`/sbin/automount.
>
>It's sounds like it's an awful lot like a loadable module in how tightly
>it's tied to the kernel. And how a kernel change can break things
>horribly. How you have to be built against the one you're going to run
>against and not the one glibc was built against.
It only means that the application will be built agains the kernel
_interface_ that was present in that version of the kernel. And
syscall/ioctl interfaces should never change, they can be added to,
and relly old depreciated interfaces can be removed, but they should
be stable for at least a few major kernel releases.
/Christer
--
"Just how much can I get away with and still go to heaven?"
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-01 2:30 ` wingel
@ 2000-08-01 23:55 ` Mike Castle
2000-08-02 0:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Mike Castle @ 2000-08-01 23:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 02:30:27AM -0000, wingel@t1.ctrl-c.liu.se wrote:
> In article <20000731211810.B28169@thune.mrc-home.org> dalgoda@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> >On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 03:13:55PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
[hpa talks about apps, like automount, needing kernel headers for versions
being ran and version glibc was built againt]
[I ask about kernel specific versions of binaries]
> It only means that the application will be built agains the kernel
> _interface_ that was present in that version of the kernel. And
> syscall/ioctl interfaces should never change, they can be added to,
> and relly old depreciated interfaces can be removed, but they should
> be stable for at least a few major kernel releases.
If they are so stable, then why does it matter which version of the kernel
glibc was built against and why aren't those kernel headers good enough to
accomplish what automounter needs?
mrc
--
Mike Castle Life is like a clock: You can work constantly
dalgoda@ix.netcom.com and be right all the time, or not work at all
www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/ and be right at least twice a day. -- mrc
We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-01 23:55 ` Mike Castle
@ 2000-08-02 0:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-08-02 9:28 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: H. Peter Anvin @ 2000-08-02 0:18 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Followup to: <20000801185531.B2091@thune.mrc-home.org>
By author: Mike Castle <dalgoda@ix.netcom.com>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> If they are so stable, then why does it matter which version of the kernel
> glibc was built against and why aren't those kernel headers good enough to
> accomplish what automounter needs?
>
They usually are just fine. However, if the automount protocol is
updated, we don't want to *have* to sit through a full glibc release
cycle.
-hpa
--
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-02 0:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
@ 2000-08-02 9:28 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-08-04 1:07 ` H. Peter Anvin
0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Miquel van Smoorenburg @ 2000-08-02 9:28 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
In article >8m7pci$fbt$1@cesium.transmeta.com>,
H. Peter Anvin <hpa@zytor.com> wrote:
>Followup to: <20000801185531.B2091@thune.mrc-home.org>
>By author: Mike Castle <dalgoda@ix.netcom.com>
>In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>>
>> If they are so stable, then why does it matter which version of the kernel
>> glibc was built against and why aren't those kernel headers good enough to
>> accomplish what automounter needs?
>>
>
>They usually are just fine. However, if the automount protocol is
>updated, we don't want to *have* to sit through a full glibc release
>cycle.
It sounds like autofs should come with it's own copy of the
needed definitions and header files then. Now if there were 20
applications all using the autofs interface to the kernel then
it would be different, but if it's just one standard implementation..
Mike.
--
Cistron Certified Internetwork Expert #1. Think free speech; drink free beer.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-02 9:28 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
@ 2000-08-04 1:07 ` H. Peter Anvin
0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: H. Peter Anvin @ 2000-08-04 1:07 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Followup to: <8m8pkq$p1r$1@enterprise.cistron.net>
By author: miquels@cistron.nl (Miquel van Smoorenburg)
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
> >
> >They usually are just fine. However, if the automount protocol is
> >updated, we don't want to *have* to sit through a full glibc release
> >cycle.
>
> It sounds like autofs should come with it's own copy of the
> needed definitions and header files then. Now if there were 20
> applications all using the autofs interface to the kernel then
> it would be different, but if it's just one standard implementation..
>
Two, at least (amd uses it as well, now.) There are a number of
similar interface issues, though, and the fact remains this is at best
an ad hoc solution.
-hpa
--
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-01 2:18 ` Mike Castle
2000-08-01 2:30 ` wingel
@ 2000-08-01 17:03 ` H. Peter Anvin
1 sibling, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: H. Peter Anvin @ 2000-08-01 17:03 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Followup to: <20000731211810.B28169@thune.mrc-home.org>
By author: Mike Castle <dalgoda@ix.netcom.com>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 03:13:55PM -0700, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> > Unfortunately that doesn't work very well. For user-space daemons
> > which talk to Linux-specific kernel interfaces, such as automount, you
> > need both the glibc and the Linux kernel headers.
>
> Does this mean that automount has to be rebuilt for every kernel? And that
> we should be running /lib/modules/`uname -r`/sbin/automount.
>
No, it doesn't.
-hpa
--
<hpa@transmeta.com> at work, <hpa@zytor.com> in private!
"Unix gives you enough rope to shoot yourself in the foot."
http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/puzzle.txt
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-07-31 21:15 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-07-31 21:49 ` Richard B. Johnson
2000-07-31 22:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
@ 2000-08-01 2:11 ` Mike Castle
2000-08-01 9:38 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Mike Castle @ 2000-08-01 2:11 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 09:15:43PM +0000, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> modules that use include/net ? The one in the kernel source is
> very, very different from the one in glibc .. so you have to compile
> with -I/path/to/kernel/include _anyway_
Maybe just make it mandatory that every time you upgrade the kernel, you
should rebuild the entire system.
mrc
--
Mike Castle Life is like a clock: You can work constantly
dalgoda@ix.netcom.com and be right all the time, or not work at all
www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/ and be right at least twice a day. -- mrc
We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-01 2:11 ` Mike Castle
@ 2000-08-01 9:38 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-08-01 23:44 ` Mike Castle
0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Miquel van Smoorenburg @ 2000-08-01 9:38 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
In article >20000731211119.A28169@thune.mrc-home.org>,
Mike Castle <dalgoda@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
>On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 09:15:43PM +0000, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
>> modules that use include/net ? The one in the kernel source is
>> very, very different from the one in glibc .. so you have to compile
>> with -I/path/to/kernel/include _anyway_
>
>Maybe just make it mandatory that every time you upgrade the kernel, you
>should rebuild the entire system.
Well for modules, yes, that is pretty much the case isn't it ?
Mike.
--
Cistron Certified Internetwork Expert #1. Think free speech; drink free beer.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-01 9:38 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
@ 2000-08-01 23:44 ` Mike Castle
0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Mike Castle @ 2000-08-01 23:44 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
On Tue, Aug 01, 2000 at 09:38:33AM +0000, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> In article >20000731211119.A28169@thune.mrc-home.org>,
> Mike Castle <dalgoda@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
> >On Mon, Jul 31, 2000 at 09:15:43PM +0000, Miquel van Smoorenburg wrote:
> >> modules that use include/net ? The one in the kernel source is
> >> very, very different from the one in glibc .. so you have to compile
> >> with -I/path/to/kernel/include _anyway_
> >
> >Maybe just make it mandatory that every time you upgrade the kernel, you
> >should rebuild the entire system.
>
> Well for modules, yes, that is pretty much the case isn't it ?
I was being facetious. I meant not only modules, but libc, and
{/usr,}/{s,}bin as well.
mrc
--
Mike Castle Life is like a clock: You can work constantly
dalgoda@ix.netcom.com and be right all the time, or not work at all
www.netcom.com/~dalgoda/ and be right at least twice a day. -- mrc
We are all of us living in the shadow of Manhattan. -- Watchmen
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-07-31 14:57 ` RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs Kai Henningsen
2000-07-31 17:35 ` Richard B. Johnson
@ 2000-08-02 18:16 ` peter swain
1 sibling, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: peter swain @ 2000-08-02 18:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kai Henningsen; +Cc: linux-kernel
> pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil (Jesse Pollard) wrote:
> > That way the "uname -r" command could be used to set a symbolic link
> > to point to the correct include files at boot time (or install time).
Kai Henningsen wrote:
> Correct for what?
correct for building kernel modules for /lib/include/$KERNEL_VER.
that's how i've used /lib/include for some time,
when needing to generate oodles of different versions of a kernel
module under active development, without necessarily having oodles of
/usr/src/linux-$KERNEL_VER trees.
i just propagate /boot/*$KERNEL_VER* and
/lib/{modules,include}/$KERNEL_VER as one tarball fully describing the
environment, to anything i'm even thinking of building on.
i do admit to maintaining boot-time /usr/include/{linux,asm} --->
/lib/include/$(uname -r)/{linux,asm} symlinks to get a consistent
usermode include tree, but it's always worried me.
The interesting parts of /usr/include are always the bleeding
edge which *hasn't* made it into glibc-blessed namespace yet.
I'm hoping some clear methodology will arise out of this bickering which
will allow stable apps to build against a static tree, with
gcc-bleeding-edge resorted to as a fallback.
[exec gcc -I/lib/include/${KERNEL_VER:-$(uname -r)} "$@"]
Ideally, binaries produced in this way would be tagged with their
dependance on version>=xx.yy.zz obvious, so they're not confused
with the stable builds, and can be ported to glibc-blessed-namespace
when new features propagate there.
^..^
(oo)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
@ 2000-07-31 17:31 Jesse Pollard
0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Jesse Pollard @ 2000-07-31 17:31 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Kai Henningsen, linux-kernel
--------- Received message begins Here ---------
>
> pollard@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil (Jesse Pollard) wrote on 27.07.00 in <200007271531.KAA89926@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>:
>
> > Might I suggest creating a "/lib/include" that works something like
> > the /lib/modules where the kernel name is used to generate the directory
> > for the kernel include files?
> >
> > That way the "uname -r" command could be used to set a symbolic link
> > to point to the correct include files at boot time (or install time).
>
> Correct for what?
>
> I think this is silly.
>
> There are two versions of header files people tend to be interested in:
>
> a. The ones corresponding to the libc version their linker will link
> against. This will be good for 99% of the situations.
>
> b. A special version for some kernel-version-dependant executable. Exact
> version depends on what they plan to do with that executable - could be
> most advanced kernel version available, least advanced version available,
> a specific version whose significance depends on the configuration of a
> different machine, whatever.
>
> There is no reason to assume that the currently running kernel version is
> any more relevant than any of the other arguments for b.
>
> > This way the kernel that is active would be selecting the correct includes.
>
> Correct for what?
I said (which got dropped) for things like the RSBAC project, which has
applications that are dependant on the current kernel for proper operation.
The RSBAC project implements multi-level security (among other things) and
supports system calls for manipulating the security labels on the kernel,
and disk files (login, init, ...). The system call list varies depending
on the kernel version, some of the data structures also depends on the
kernel version. The symbolic link would allow a boot time selection of
the correct include files if I need to rebuild/debug them.
When I boot an older/test kernel, the executables used are no longer
valid. Building new executables during test would also invalidate the
older/current ones.
I see using a symbolic link (which I may do on my own) as a way to
preserve system level consistancy, by having different versions of the
executables in my search path/cron job search path.
I can see this also providing advantages for module initialization - well
only the ones that require external hardware initialization. Things like
some wide area net cards, terminal multiplexors...
Some of these require compatablility between module and hardware microcode
for proper functionality. An older kernel will require an older module, and
that older module may require older microcode (not to mention, and older
loader application). Using a version link would simplify the automatic
selection of the proper initialization code.
Now I can do all this on my own, but it might be usefull for more than
just what I see; and others might see pitfalls that I missed.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jesse I Pollard, II
Email: pollard@navo.hpc.mil
Any opinions expressed are solely my own.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <20000728112353Z160228-16385+645@vger.rutgers.edu>]
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
[not found] <20000728112353Z160228-16385+645@vger.rutgers.edu>
@ 2000-07-31 15:26 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-08-01 7:53 ` David Howells
0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Kai Henningsen @ 2000-07-31 15:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
David.Howells@nexor.co.uk (David Howells) wrote on 28.07.00 in <20000728112353Z160228-16385+645@vger.rutgers.edu>:
> Why not /usr/modules or /usr/kernel for the stuff required to compile
> modules (in other words stuff that the kernel doesn't actually use), for
> example:
I notice just about everybody suggesting absolute paths.
Try relative paths or environment variables instead. This has the
advantage of working anywhere you damn well please.
MfG Kai
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-07-31 15:26 ` Kai Henningsen
@ 2000-08-01 7:53 ` David Howells
2000-08-01 18:15 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-08-02 6:52 ` wingel
0 siblings, 2 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: David Howells @ 2000-08-01 7:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
Kai Henningsen wrote:
> I notice just about everybody suggesting absolute paths.
>
> Try relative paths or environment variables instead. This has the
> advantage of working anywhere you damn well please.
Relative to what? Which environment variables? Who sets these variables?
David Howells
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-01 7:53 ` David Howells
@ 2000-08-01 18:15 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-08-02 6:52 ` wingel
1 sibling, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Kai Henningsen @ 2000-08-01 18:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
David.Howells@nexor.co.uk (David Howells) wrote on 01.08.00 in <20000801073357Z157113-15702+213@vger.rutgers.edu>:
> Kai Henningsen wrote:
> > I notice just about everybody suggesting absolute paths.
> >
> > Try relative paths or environment variables instead. This has the
> > advantage of working anywhere you damn well please.
>
> Relative to what? Which environment variables? Who sets these variables?
Relative paths are relative to the current directory, and have always been
that way.
And of course, those environment variables would be set by the user.
What's so hard to understand about this?
MfG Kai
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-08-01 7:53 ` David Howells
2000-08-01 18:15 ` Kai Henningsen
@ 2000-08-02 6:52 ` wingel
1 sibling, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: wingel @ 2000-08-02 6:52 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: David.Howells; +Cc: linux-kernel
David.Howells@nexor.co.uk wrote:
>Kai Henningsen wrote:
>> I notice just about everybody suggesting absolute paths.
>>
>> Try relative paths or environment variables instead. This has the
>> advantage of working anywhere you damn well please.
>
>Relative to what? Which environment variables? Who sets these variables?
Relative to the current directory of course.
I've been propagating for this too, since it makes life so much easier
for people compiling multiple versions of the kernel.
The idea is that you tell people to untar the sources for whatever kernel
related packages at the same place they untarred the kernel sources. For
most users this will mean /usr/src (i.e. on a RedHat system).
So for the simple case:
/usr/src/linux
/usr/src/pcmcia-cs
/usr/src/my-whizbang-adapter
and the pcmcia-cs and whizbang packages simply have line in Makefile saying:
KERNELDIR=../linux
For somebody who's playing around with multiple kernels, it would
look something like this:
/usr/src/kernel-2.2.16/linux
/usr/src/kernel-2.2.16/pcmcia-cs
/usr/src/kernel-2.2.16/my-whizbang-adapter
/usr/src/kernel-2.2.17pre3/linux
/usr/src/kernel-2.2.17pre3/pcmcia-cs
/usr/src/kernel-2.2.17pre3/my-whizbang-adapter
And this will work with _no_ modifications to the sources and without
any need to set environment variables. How much easier can it get?
/Christer
--
"Just how much can I get away with and still go to heaven?"
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <FyFI8n.IpM@spuddy.mew.co.uk>]
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
[not found] <FyFI8n.IpM@spuddy.mew.co.uk>
@ 2000-07-29 10:34 ` Stephen Harris
0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Stephen Harris @ 2000-07-29 10:34 UTC (permalink / raw)
Khimenko Victor (khim@sch57.msk.ru) wrote:
: And I find it ridiculous. Yes, for FILES I agree - it's place to install
: local files for system. But for directory stubs... Where the hell I must
: put local perl packages ? I prefer /usr/local/lib/perl for architecture
: specific-ones and /usr/local/share/perl . And I (as dstribuion creator)
: even can configure perl to use this directories. But I CAN NOT (according
: to FHS) create this directories. Gosh. So now I need to GUEES where I can
This is an old question and was hashed out many times on the original
FSSTND list (yikes, back in the early 90's!). If you are creating a general
purpose distribution, then these files are _not_ local to anything, so
/usr/local is trivially the wrong place. If you are creating a distribution
local to your company, then feel free to use /usr/local. If you are
automating an install for your environment, then feel free to use /usr/local.
Any distribution that uses /usr/local for general distribution is not FSSTND
(sorry, FHS) compliant.
It's very simple, really.
: Your packager should handle this. If it's not part of OS then it should be
: installed in /opt - this part of FHS looks Ok.
And this had the most arguments of all :-) Probably 60% of all traffic
was about this :-)
--
Stephen Harris
sweh@spuddy.mew.co.uk http://www.spuddy.org/
The truth is the truth, and opinion just opinion. But what is what?
My employer pays to ignore my opinions; you get to do it for free.
* Meeeeow ! Call Spud the Cat on > 01708 442043 < for free Usenet access *
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <200007281315.OAA30398@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>]
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
[not found] <200007281315.OAA30398@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
@ 2000-07-29 1:09 ` David Howells
0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: David Howells @ 2000-07-29 1:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Russell King
Cc: linux-kernel, Jamie Lokier, Ulrich Drepper, Linus Torvalds, Alan Cox
Russell King writes:
> David Howells writes:
> > Why not /usr/modules or /usr/kernel for the stuff required to compile modules
> > (in other words stuff that the kernel doesn't actually use), for example:
>
> All these discussions about moving stuff to /usr are forgetting one
> fundamental point in the FHS - /usr is NOT guaranteed to be mounted
> at boot. In fact, /usr may very well be shared between machines.
You missed my point - put _compile_ time stuff under /usr/whatever and
_runtime_ stuff under /lib/modules or /kernel
David Howells
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <200007272122.RAA04791@tsx-prime.MIT.EDU>]
[parent not found: <no.id>]
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
[not found] <no.id>
@ 2000-07-28 22:10 ` Adam Sampson
2000-07-28 22:20 ` Adam Sampson
1 sibling, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Adam Sampson @ 2000-07-28 22:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 12:39:51AM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:
> Is there some documentation file that I've not updated and that people
> are slavishly following outdated information in? I don't read the
> documentation myself, so I'd never notice ;)
Yes; the glibc installation instructions.
--
Adam Sampson
azz@gnu.org
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
[not found] <no.id>
2000-07-28 22:10 ` Adam Sampson
@ 2000-07-28 22:20 ` Adam Sampson
2000-07-29 13:23 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
1 sibling, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Adam Sampson @ 2000-07-28 22:20 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 07:03:57PM +0200, Jamie Lokier wrote:
> But instead, how about a script: /lib/modules/VERSION/compile-module.
> The script would know where to find the kernel headers. That could be
> /lib/modules/include for distributions, and /my/kernel/tree/include for
> folks who used `make modules_install' recently.
I'll second that suggestion. This kind of thing works very well indeed for
projects like Apache.
--
Adam Sampson
azz@gnu.org
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-07-28 22:20 ` Adam Sampson
@ 2000-07-29 13:23 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Miquel van Smoorenburg @ 2000-07-29 13:23 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
In article <cistron.20000728232030.C8868@gnu.org>,
Adam Sampson <azz@gnu.org> wrote:
>On Thu, Jul 27, 2000 at 07:03:57PM +0200, Jamie Lokier wrote:
>> But instead, how about a script: /lib/modules/VERSION/compile-module.
>> The script would know where to find the kernel headers. That could be
>> /lib/modules/include for distributions, and /my/kernel/tree/include for
>> folks who used `make modules_install' recently.
>
>I'll second that suggestion. This kind of thing works very well indeed for
>projects like Apache.
It is indeed a very good idea. The script could just spit out the
CFLAGS used for kernel compilation like this:
#! /bin/sh
cat <<EOF
-D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/linux-2.2.15/include -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe -fno-strength-reduce -m486 -malign-loops=2 -malign-jumps=2 -malign-functions=2 -DCPU=686 -DUTS_MACHINE='"i386"'
EOF
Then a module Makefile would be as simple as
# Set KVER manually if you want to compile against another kernel version
KVER=$(shell uname -r)
CFLAGS=$(shell /lib/modules/$(KVER)/kernel-config)
module.o: module.c module.h
I've tried this, it works.
Mike.
--
Cistron Certified Internetwork Expert #1. Think free speech; drink free beer.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <3981ED0C.CBE0A0F9@transmeta.com>]
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
[not found] <3981ED0C.CBE0A0F9@transmeta.com>
@ 2000-07-28 21:02 ` Khimenko Victor
0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: Khimenko Victor @ 2000-07-28 21:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: H. Peter Anvin; +Cc: Peter Jones, clubneon, linux-kernel
On Fri, 28 Jul 2000, H. Peter Anvin wrote:
> Peter Jones wrote:
> > >
> > > You missed the point here. Yes, /usr/lib/perl is just fine. But what
> > > about locally compiled modules ? You can download thing from CPAN,
> > > compile it and install. It's simple: perl Makefile.PL ; make ; make
> > > install ... It'll compile CPAN module and will install it ... where
> > > it'll install it ? Currently it'll install it in
> > > /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/i386-linux (arch-dependant files) or in
> > > /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl (non-arch-dependant files). Emacs will search
> > > for additional packages in /usr/share/emacs/20.7/site-lisp (and
> > > /usr/share/emacs/site-lisp) and so on. And sysadmin can not change it
> > > easily: you need to recompile perl, emacs or tcl.
> >
>
> Ever heard of "symlinks"?
>
Yeah, of course. Just FHS closed this way as well. Yes, I (as distribution
maker) can make /usr/lib/perl5/site_perl/i386-linux symlink to
/usr/local/lib/perl but since
-- cut --
This directory should always be empty after first installing a
FHS-compliant system. No exceptions to this rule should be made other
than the listed directory stubs.
-- cut --
I (as distribution maker) can not create /usr/local/lib/perl directory.
Thus perl's make install will mysteriously fail while trying to install
stuff. Or I (as sysadmin) must GUESS that I should create /usr/local/lib/perl
before using perl's `make install' ? Gosh. So much for FHS-compliance.
Or may be you can suggest some other clever way to solve this problem ?
P.S. May be I just poor in English and in fact creation of subdirectories
UNDER /usr/local (not IN /usr/local) is allowed ? At least it looks like
Debian mantainers think so:
-- cut --
3.1.2 Site-specific programs
As mandated by the FHS no package should place any files in
/usr/local, either by putting them in the file system archive to be
unpacked by dpkg or by manipulating them in their maintainer scripts.
However, the package should create empty directories below /usr/local
so that the system administrator knows where to place site-specific
files. These directories should be removed on package removal if they
are empty.
Note, that this applies only to directories below /usr/local, not in
/usr/local. The directory /usr/local itself may only contain the
sub-directories listed in FHS, section 4.6. However, you may create
directories below them as you wish. You may not remove any of the
directories listed in 4.6, even if you created them.
-- cut --
It this is so then it's Ok: there are really no need to put anything in
/usr/local itself and under /usr/local only empty directoryes for local
stuff are needed...
Looks like FHS wording is too vague in this place...
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <Pine.LNX.4.21.0007280808460.73-100000@rc.priv.hereintown.net>]
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.21.0007280808460.73-100000@rc.priv.hereintown.net>
@ 2000-07-28 20:56 ` Stuart Lynne
2000-07-28 20:13 ` clubneon
0 siblings, 1 reply; 41+ messages in thread
From: Stuart Lynne @ 2000-07-28 20:56 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-kernel
In article <Pine.LNX.4.21.0007280808460.73-100000@rc.priv.hereintown.net>,
Chris Meadors <clubneon@hereintown.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Thomas Molina wrote:
>
>> No I'm not kidding. Based on some comments by Linus earlier, he is
>> advocating putting the kernel source tree out of the way of glibc and
>> other "standard" development tools. /usr/local seems a better fit to me
>> than /lib/modules. According to FHS /lib is for essential shared
>> libraries and kernel modules. It also says one of the uses of
>> /usr/local is for local source code. It's also one of the few places
>> which shouldn't get clobbered in a system software upgrade.
>
>FHS also says that a distro should ship with nothing in the /usr/local
>tree.
>
>But the FHS also says you can't have things like /usr/apache. But I find
>that most useful, as deleting one directory removes all traces of the
>program. Large packages that would normally end up all over the place can
>be contained (like X, which FHS does allow to have its own place under
>/usr).
You can do that in /opt or /usr/local if you like.
>> It was an opinion; I'm expressing my 'druthers, if you will. I know
>> others don't agree. I see where it looks as if Linus is leaning towards
>> /lib/modules anyway, so I'll adapt. Or I'll be contrary and make
>> appropriate local changes in the source code. As long as Linus keeps it
>> as a self-contained entity it won't matter anyway.
>
>/lib/modules seems good enough. But as somone else said, it might make
>more sence to be /lib/kernel. The one problem I see with this, is I
>usually have a small(ish) root partition. On any installation I've done
>/lib has never had its own partition. And on most, the root partition
>hasn't been big enough to hold an unpacked kernel tree.
/lib/modules is probably the easiest place to get some agreement. The
contents of that directory is not specified as of FHS 2.1.
This discussion should probably be done on the FHS list so that the
results can written up in that document. It currently mandates that
(for example) /usr/include/linux points at /usr/src/linux/include/linux.
--
__O
Fireplug - a Lineo company _-\<,_
PGP Fingerprint: 28 E2 A0 15 99 62 9A 00 (_)/ (_) 88 EC A3 EE 2D 1C 15 68
Stuart Lynne <sl@fireplug.net> www.fireplug.net 604-461-7532
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
* Re: RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs
2000-07-28 20:56 ` Stuart Lynne
@ 2000-07-28 20:13 ` clubneon
0 siblings, 0 replies; 41+ messages in thread
From: clubneon @ 2000-07-28 20:13 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: sl; +Cc: linux-kernel
On 28 Jul 2000, Stuart Lynne wrote:
> In article <Pine.LNX.4.21.0007280808460.73-100000@rc.priv.hereintown.net>,
> Chris Meadors <clubneon@hereintown.net> wrote:
> >
> >But the FHS also says you can't have things like /usr/apache. But I find
> >that most useful, as deleting one directory removes all traces of the
> >program. Large packages that would normally end up all over the place can
> >be contained (like X, which FHS does allow to have its own place under
> >/usr).
>
> You can do that in /opt or /usr/local if you like.
Just because so many (2 or 3) people have mentioned this to me I'll reply
to it shortly.
The problem I have with /opt is I'm not used to it yet. I'd have to put
it on it's own partition just like /usr, /home, and /var. I don't have
any feeling for how big /opt should be and I usually totally just forget
about it.
I'm building a new system now, I'm going to attempt to make use of /opt
for larger, self-contained packages. BUT /opt is going to be a symlink to
/usr/local (take that FHS). At least now I'll get a little more used to
using /opt.
Boy, I can't think of one thing to say that'll make this relevent to the
kernel.
Chris Meadors (at home)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 41+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <E13HsBT-00033e-00@the-village.bc.nu>]
end of thread, other threads:[~2000-08-04 0:46 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 41+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <200007271459.KAA04701@tsx-prime.MIT.EDU>
[not found] ` <200007271531.KAA89926@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>
2000-07-31 14:57 ` RLIM_INFINITY inconsistency between archs Kai Henningsen
2000-07-31 17:35 ` Richard B. Johnson
2000-07-31 20:06 ` Mike Galbraith
2000-07-31 21:15 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-07-31 21:49 ` Richard B. Johnson
2000-07-31 22:39 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-07-31 22:13 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-07-31 22:33 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-08-01 0:17 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-08-01 0:43 ` wingel
2000-08-01 1:00 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-08-01 2:06 ` wingel
2000-08-01 9:36 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-08-01 17:03 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-08-01 21:50 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-08-01 2:18 ` Mike Castle
2000-08-01 2:30 ` wingel
2000-08-01 23:55 ` Mike Castle
2000-08-02 0:18 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-08-02 9:28 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-08-04 1:07 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-08-01 17:03 ` H. Peter Anvin
2000-08-01 2:11 ` Mike Castle
2000-08-01 9:38 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
2000-08-01 23:44 ` Mike Castle
2000-08-02 18:16 ` peter swain
2000-07-31 17:31 Jesse Pollard
[not found] <20000728112353Z160228-16385+645@vger.rutgers.edu>
2000-07-31 15:26 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-08-01 7:53 ` David Howells
2000-08-01 18:15 ` Kai Henningsen
2000-08-02 6:52 ` wingel
[not found] <FyFI8n.IpM@spuddy.mew.co.uk>
2000-07-29 10:34 ` Stephen Harris
[not found] <200007281315.OAA30398@flint.arm.linux.org.uk>
2000-07-29 1:09 ` David Howells
[not found] <200007272122.RAA04791@tsx-prime.MIT.EDU>
[not found] ` <m2hf9bnm95.fsf@euler.axel.nom>
[not found] ` <20000728162225.A4317@saw.sw.com.sg>
2000-07-29 0:51 ` Mike Castle
[not found] <no.id>
2000-07-28 22:10 ` Adam Sampson
2000-07-28 22:20 ` Adam Sampson
2000-07-29 13:23 ` Miquel van Smoorenburg
[not found] <3981ED0C.CBE0A0F9@transmeta.com>
2000-07-28 21:02 ` Khimenko Victor
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.21.0007280808460.73-100000@rc.priv.hereintown.net>
2000-07-28 20:56 ` Stuart Lynne
2000-07-28 20:13 ` clubneon
[not found] <E13HsBT-00033e-00@the-village.bc.nu>
[not found] ` <200007281405.JAA101655@tomcat.admin.navo.hpc.mil>
2000-07-28 14:11 ` Jamie Lokier
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).