Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Mon, 27 Jan 2003 11:31:00 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Mon, 27 Jan 2003 11:31:00 -0500 Received: from chaos.physics.uiowa.edu ([128.255.34.189]:15564 "EHLO chaos.physics.uiowa.edu") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Mon, 27 Jan 2003 11:30:59 -0500 Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 10:39:45 -0600 (CST) From: Kai Germaschewski X-X-Sender: kai@chaos.physics.uiowa.edu To: David Woodhouse cc: Christian Zander , Mark Fasheh , Thomas Schlichter , "Randy.Dunlap" , Sam Ravnborg , LKML , Rusty Russell Subject: Re: no version magic, tainting kernel. In-Reply-To: <8626.1043684963@passion.cambridge.redhat.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 27 Jan 2003, David Woodhouse wrote: > Er, I think O_TARGET is in fact the target _module_ name when building > a file system as a module. Try removing O_TARGET from 2.4 fs/ext2/Makefile > and building ext2 as a module. Well, okay, there's two ways you can build a single module in a directory in 2.4, one is to have O_TARGET := module.o obj-m := $(O_TARGET) obj-y := part1.o part2.o The other is O_TARGET := something.o obj-m := module.o module-objs := part1.o part2.o (plus a link rule for module.o) In 2.5, only the second way is legal, so if you're aiming for a compatible Makefile, you'd use that one, and then O_TARGET shouldn't matter for "make modules". --Kai - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/