"Robert P. J. Day" wrote: > instead (at least recently), the *official* way to do this is to > refer to the symlink /lib/modules/2.5.xx/build, which is always > created via "make modules_install" to point back to the kernel > source/build directory itself. Which is a really ugly solution which I always hated. `make modules_install` should *copy* the required header files just like it copies the modules itself (actually, the kernel header files should be copied when the kernel is installed, module_install should only copy the headers of those modules which are being installed. Try to ask at lkml about this to see what the kernel maintainers think about it. http://vger.kernel.org/vger-lists.html#linux-kernel Archives at http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=linux-kernel , of course. ;-)) > p.s. the above is in aid of a current discussion on the FHS mailing > list regarding the appropriate location for the kernel source/build > directory, and why /usr/src is not a great idea. Is that list open to the public? I'd like to lurk around... Any archives? Best regards, Martin Stricker -- Homepage: http://www.martin-stricker.de/ Linux Migration Project: http://www.linux-migration.org/ Red Hat Linux 8.0 for low memory: http://www.rule-project.org/ Registered Linux user #210635: http://counter.li.org/
