kernel source/module directions and why windows users are happy

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Am Sonntag, den 22.08.2004, 18:49 +0200 schrieb Arjan van de Ven:
> On Sun, 2004-08-22 at 18:36, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > Am Sonntag, den 22.08.2004, 15:15 +0200 schrieb Arjan van de Ven:
> > > I rather ship a script in kernel-utils to turn the src.rpm into a full
> > > source.
> > 
> > Yes, that could also be done. But I think the fedora-extras solution
> > will be easier for a lot of people. And could be used *if* drivers like
> > the ati fglrx driver currently need parts from the source. 
> 
> actually the fglrx module is a special case. It's distribution is
> lacking a few headers that it then attempts to "steal" from the kernel
> source, however the proper thing to do would be to just ship these
> headers with the module. These headers basically don't depend on the
> kernel. I have talked to the DRM guys about this before and they seem to
> feel that those headers belong to go with the driver, as opposed to be
> moved to include/ and be used for building drivers against. 
> They mean those headers are NOT interface definitions. They are an
> integral part of the code of a DRM module, and DRM internals change, and
> all drivers in the kernel tree will adapt. External ones don't. *but
> they don't need to*, they can just ship the files they were designed
> against. Unlike most other headers, these headers do NOT define some
> internal kernel binary interface.

Will forward to ATI. Thanks.
 

-- 
Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora at leemhuis.info>