thank you for your correction. you never stop learning .. :) Marco Frattola (S3 - Sviluppo Software e Sistemi) - Cubecom S.p.A. Via de Marini,1 3 piano Torre WTC 16149 GENOVA tel. 010 6591184
> Da: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Inviato: giovedì 25 maggio 2000 19.45 > A: debian-user@lists.debian.org > Oggetto: Re: R: R: tulip.o kernel module > > > marco frattola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >Parrish M Myers <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I built it by hand. Reason being I shouldn't have to recompile the > >> entire kernel to add one module. So I tried it that way. I > >> downloaded > >> the 2.2.14 kernel-source and messed arround with the > compile command > >> for a while and found that the sugested command: > >> > >> gcc -DMODULE -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/linux/net/inet -Wall > >> -Wstrict-prototypes -O6 -c tulip.c > >> > >> does not work... but > >> > >> gcc -DMODULE -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/linux/include -Wall > >> -Wstrict-prototypes -O6 -c tulip.c > >> > >> worked. Once that was done, I thought I just had to install the > >> module in the correct place and do a 'depmod -a'. > > Er! I'm not surprised it broke, then. The Makefiles are there to help > you, and if you use them your life will become a lot easier. The fact > that gcc didn't return any errors doesn't necessarily mean that it was > doing what you thought it was doing (the object file you produced > probably needed to be linked against something else). Try changing to > the directory containing tulip.c and typing 'make tulip.o' > instead, then > installing it as before. > > If that doesn't work, then I've missed out a step, too; trying 'make > modules' or just 'make' in the appropriate directory might > work better, > even if it takes a little longer (it's still not a full kernel > recompilation). Your problem, at any rate, is that tulip.o > isn't linked > against something against which it needs to be linked, which doesn't > surprise me too much when it's compiled with just 'gcc -c'. > > >i don't think you can build module(s) without building the > kernel that will > >use it/them. > >i've always made my kernel a-la debian (with kernel-package) > and never had > >problems with modules. > >the reason is (my opinion, please correct if i'm wrong) that > kernel need to > >know which modules it has to be prepared to support. > > No, that's not true. This is what modules are for ... and, if you use > module versioning, you *may* be able to get modules compiled against a > different kernel version to work, too.