[MPlayer-users] Compile with new kernel

[Gábor Lénárt]

On Thu, Jul 31, 2003 at 07:00:18PM +0200, gabucino at mplayerhq.hu wrote:
> [Automatic answer: RTFM (read DOCS, FAQ), also read DOCS/bugreports.html]

> > Arghh, this is BAD. It shouldn't be done this way!
> 6 years of Linux experience, and no problems caused by this :)

Just compilation errors, like vo fbdev as you can see :)
You can't deny this fact: this is a sympthom of the fault of your
logic :)

And how said that kernel should be at /usr/src/linux?

I have several kernels, and not even /usr/src/linux directory. So where
can you symlink then? :) And if you're using multiple kernels, let's say
a 2.4.x for daily work, and 2.6.0-test2 for testing? You should relink
/usr/include/linux each time you boot into a new kernel? ;-)

The correct policy: for "normal" user space programs you should include
from /usr/include/linux which is kernel headers glibc was compiled against,
and specify the ABSOLUTE path of withing kernel source if you depend on
a certain kernel, the desired method is to add the following path to
eg -I switch of gcc:

/lib/modules/(kernel-version)/build/include/linux

If you look around, you will notice that this is the method used by
most people nowdays. And if you do this, it does not matter, that
my kernel is in /home/lgb and not in /usr/src ;-)

> > because you should compile both of glibc and kernel if any of them is
> > replaced
> Recompile glibc on kernel upgrade. Muhaha. :)

Recompile IF you do that stupid symlinking!

> > And if you don't beleive me, ask kernel developers.
> Those gcc 2.95+1 fans? :)

Far from it. ;-) I mean REAL developers.

Gabu, as you know I like you :), but please do not argue, I think I know
much more about kernel than you :) It's a pointless argument, and you try to
show your truth with jokes and hypes, but not actual technical facts ...

- Gábor (larta'H)