VMware with FC2T1

[Robert P. J. Day]

On Wed, 10 Mar 2004, Ben Steeves wrote:

> On Wed, 2004-03-10 at 05:22, Robert P. J. Day wrote:
> > On Tue, 09 Mar 2004 23:29:22 -0400, Ben Steeves <bcs at metacon.ca> wrote:
> > > vmware-config.pl keeps complaining about not being able to find
> > > '/usr/src/linux-2.6.3-2.1.246/include/linux/version.h', which, indeed,
> > > does not appear to exist.
> > 
> > if history is any guide, if you've done a serious clean of the kernel source
> > tree (like with "make mrproper"), the include/linux/version.h file is removed.
> > it's regenerated once you do any kind of "make ???config".
> > 
> > or you should just be able to do "make include/linux/version.h" to regenerate
> > that file.
> 
> That's interesting.  With the 2.4 kernels, I could just install the
> kernel-source package, run vmware-config.pl, and be off to the races.  
> 
> Is there any documentation outlining the differences between the
> packaging methodologies/strategies used in the Fedora 2.4 kernel-source
> packages vs. the 2.6 kernel-source packages?

ok, here's my understanding, and i'm sure i'll screw it up somewhere.  if
you have any build that requires inclusion of the file
"include/linux/version.h", then you need the kernel source tree on your
system somewhere, and you have to make sure that file exists in the kernel 
source tree; that is, you must have done at least a minimal config for 
that file to have been generated.

now, rather than having to point at the kernel source tree directly, the
recommended(?) strategy is to use the symlink that you'll find under
/lib/modules/<kernel-version>/build for the currently running kernel, is
that about right?

this gives you the flexibility of installing the kernel source tree 
elsewhere from /usr/src, and /lib/modules will keep track of where that 
source tree is using that symlink.  personally, i install all my kernel 
source trees under my regular home directory, so i can configure and build 
them as a regular user.

comments?

rday