When we make a patch, why not generate the sensors.h and then put the
result in the patch for installation in include/linux/sensors.h or similar.
If you're going to compile user space code against your patched kernel,
you're going to need that header file and I would expect that the
user-space command line would need to specify:
-I/lib/modules/$(uname -r)/build/include
or it's equivalent...
:v)
Mark D. Studebaker wrote:
> I think that sensors.h (which is autogenerated now) is now userspace-only
> (it isn't included by any chip driver). So I'll remove it from FILES and
> INCLUDES.
>
> Mark M. Hoffman wrote:
>
>> * Mark M. Hoffman <mhoffman at lightlink.com> [2003-06-22 11:17:05 -0400]:
>>
>>> * Mark D. Studebaker <mds at paradyne.com> [2003-06-22 09:57:34 -0400]:
>>>
>>>> I got mkpatch working on both i2c and sensors,
>>>> both configuring as modules and compiling-in.
>>>> Please test.
>>>>
>>>> A few hints:
>>>>
>>>> - Follow steps in order: generate and apply i2c patch; then generate
>>>> and apply sensors patch.
>>>
>>>
>>> I2C mkpatch works and applies cleanly to 2.4.9.
>>>
>>> Then lm_sensors mkpatch says this:
>>>
>>> Can't open './kernel/include/sensors.h' at mkpatch/mkpatch.pl line 1432.
>>>
>>> Is that file generated on the fly now?
>>
>>
>>
>> Hmmm, it's in there... but 'make clean' deleted it. Is that the right
>> thing
>> for 'make clean' to do?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>
--
Philip Pokorny, Director of Engineering
Tel: 415-358-2635 Fax: 415-358-2646 Toll Free: 888-PENGUIN
PENGUIN COMPUTING, INC.
www.penguincomputing.com
