I cannot compile the emu10k1 module:
sound/oss/emu10k1/hwaccess.c:182: redefinition of `emu10k1_writefn0_2'
sound/oss/emu10k1/hwaccess.c:164: `emu10k1_writefn0_2' previously defined here
make[3]: *** [sound/oss/emu10k1/hwaccess.o] Error 1
make[2]: *** [sound/oss/emu10k1] Error 2
make[1]: *** [sound/oss] Error 2
make: *** [sound] Error 2
Everything else looks fine till now...
On Sul, 2003-07-27 at 20:02, Balram Adlakha wrote:
> I cannot compile the emu10k1 module:
>
> sound/oss/emu10k1/hwaccess.c:182: redefinition of `emu10k1_writefn0_2'
> sound/oss/emu10k1/hwaccess.c:164: `emu10k1_writefn0_2' previously defined here
Looks like bad patching 182 is unrelated in my tree
On Sunday 27 July 2003 20:02, Balram Adlakha wrote:
> I cannot compile the emu10k1 module:
>
> sound/oss/emu10k1/hwaccess.c:182: redefinition of `emu10k1_writefn0_2'
> sound/oss/emu10k1/hwaccess.c:164: `emu10k1_writefn0_2' previously defined
> here make[3]: *** [sound/oss/emu10k1/hwaccess.o] Error 1
> make[2]: *** [sound/oss/emu10k1] Error 2
> make[1]: *** [sound/oss] Error 2
> make: *** [sound] Error 2
Try patching a fresh tree, or redownload the 2.6.0-test2 tarball. It compiles
fine here.
Cheers,
Alistair Strachan.
> I cannot compile the emu10k1 module:
>
> sound/oss/emu10k1/hwaccess.c:182: redefinition of `emu10k1_writefn0_2'
> sound/oss/emu10k1/hwaccess.c:164: `emu10k1_writefn0_2' previously defined here
You screwed up somehow, I see only one definition of that function in 2.6.0-test2...
Rudo.
On Mon, 28 Jul 2003 00:32:57 +0530 Balram Adlakha <[email protected]> wrote:
| I cannot compile the emu10k1 module:
|
| sound/oss/emu10k1/hwaccess.c:182: redefinition of `emu10k1_writefn0_2'
| sound/oss/emu10k1/hwaccess.c:164: `emu10k1_writefn0_2' previously defined here
| make[3]: *** [sound/oss/emu10k1/hwaccess.o] Error 1
| make[2]: *** [sound/oss/emu10k1] Error 2
| make[1]: *** [sound/oss] Error 2
| make: *** [sound] Error 2
|
|
| Everything else looks fine till now...
| -
I don't see this problem when I build it.
Could it be a source file (or download) problem?
or a tools problem?
--
~Randy