Le Wed, 28 Nov 2007 00:11:37 +0330,
"Iman Darabi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> a écrit :
> On Nov 28, 2007 12:09 AM, Iman Darabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> interesting ...
> i can guess why : maybe because of symlink's path ( am i right ? )
>
> but what about modules :
> i use this command to compile m
On Nov 28, 2007 12:09 AM, Iman Darabi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
interesting ...
i can guess why : maybe because of symlink's path ( am i right ? )
but what about modules :
i use this command to compile my module :
make -C /lib/modules/$(shell uname -r)/build M=$(PWD) modules
#shell uname -r -> 2
On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 08:47:20PM +0330, Iman Darabi wrote:
> hi
> 2.6.11 don't have any include/asm directory but i can compile some
> modules which has or even content of is :
>...
> i got 2.6.11 from kernel.org . ( 2.6.4 is the same as 2.6.11 )
>
> BTW : 2.6.22 has asm symbolic link to asm
hi
2.6.11 don't have any include/asm directory but i can compile some
modules which has or even content of is :
#ifndef _LINUX_IOCTL_H
#define _LINUX_IOCTL_H
#include
#endif /* _LINUX_IOCTL_H */
i'm wondring why module compilation dosen't give me any error ?! ( even
kernel compilation was
