On Monday 05 September 2005 21:13, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > On Mon, Sep 05, 2005 at 08:35:14PM +0100, Alistair John Strachan wrote: > > On Monday 05 September 2005 18:41, Sam Ravnborg wrote: > > > Hi Linus. > > > > > > kbuild updates as accumulated over the last few months. > > > All patches has been in -mm in one or several versions. > > > > > > Most noteworthy: > > > 1) -Wundef added to CFLAGS. This is the cause of several new warnings, > > > which for the most part has been fixed for now. > > > 2) "PREEMPT" in UTS_VERSION. So we complain when dealing > > > with modules compiled for a wrong kernel > > > > How is this different from the preempt module vermagic? > > > > ~$ modinfo agpgart | grep vermagic > > vermagic: 2.6.13 preempt gcc-4.0 > > My bad. Adding PREEMT to UTS_VERSION makes it visible in uname -a. >
I see. I can understand adding an extraversion for SMP and experimental patches (like Ingo's RT work), but why is it useful to differentiate (by name) between preempt and non-preempt kernels? Do distributors wish to package both in parallel? -- Cheers, Alistair. 'No sense being pessimistic, it probably wouldn't work anyway.' Third year Computer Science undergraduate. 1F2 55 South Clerk Street, Edinburgh, UK. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
