Message-ID: <47B65E35.8020905@keyaccess.nl>
Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2008 04:53:25 +0100
From: Rene Herman <rene.herman@keyaccess.nl>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071031)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Roland McGrath <roland@redhat.com>
CC: Linux Kernel <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
       Sam Ravnborg <sam@ravnborg.org>, linux-kbuild@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: 2.6.25-rc2 vdso_install breaks user "make install"
References: <47B6592A.6030200@keyaccess.nl> <20080216034211.8DD03270193@magilla.localdomain>
In-Reply-To: <20080216034211.8DD03270193@magilla.localdomain>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
Content-Length: 1178
Lines: 30

On 16-02-08 04:42, Roland McGrath wrote:

> Perhaps it makes more sense to have vdso_install be a dependency of 
> modules_install rather than install, since they both put things in
> /lib/modules.

Would work for me -- modules_install ofcourse runs as root.

> The installed vdso images are potentially useful for a kernel when you 
> aren't bothering to build or install any modules, but those images are
> only ever useful for sophisticated debugging uses anyway.
> 
> Sam, any thoughts?  (See arch/x86/Makefile and arch/powerpc/Makefile.)

Or maybe update the installkernel "protocol" to add these in?

> The only kind of install runs I actually care about are for packaging 
> system builds.  There the packaged build does 'make vdso_install' 
> explicitly anyway (at least Fedora rpms' .spec does).  So if the
> consensus is just to drop the dependency on vdso_install completely, I
> don't object.

Did that for now...

Rene.
--
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/