Oliver Hartkopp wrote: > Wolfgang Grandegger wrote: >> Oliver Hartkopp wrote: > >>>>> AFAIK you can only create symlinks for real files (not directories) in the >>>>> SVN. I would suggest to replace the .h-files in 2.6/include/linux with >>>>> symlinks pointing to the .h-files in 2.6/include/socketcan >>>> But we could do it in the Makefile, as the Linux kernel does for >>>> include/asm. >>> Hm - i still don't have a idea how this is done. >>> >>> For me it would be important, that userspace Makefiles like the current >>> can-utils/Makefile do not need to be changed. >>> >>> Is this possible? >> No. > > Too bad. > > I know from several simple userspace build environments (or when you even have > no environment/Makefile) that they rely on defining an additional include path > to compile. > > Creating symlinks inside these Makefiles (if available) would touch a huge > number of userspace Makefiles to be modified.
OK, I agree. > Can we make it the other way round that the Makefiles in kernel/2.6 can be > changed to create a symlink as you suggested? To avoid the symbolic links, what about replacing the header files as show below: $ cd trunk/kernel/2.6/include/linux $ cat can.h #include <socketcan/can.h> $ cat can/error.h #include <socketcan/can/error.h> And we only need that for the files specified in the kernels Kbuild CAN files: can.h can/raw.h can/bcm.h can/error.h can/netlink.h All other include files could be removed. That would be rather clean, from my point of view. Wolfgang. _______________________________________________ Socketcan-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/socketcan-core
