Re: Missing #include <config.h>

[Geert Uytterhoeven]

On Tue, 13 Sep 2005, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 03:08:26PM +0100, Russell King wrote:
> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2005 at 02:56:23PM +0100, J?rn Engel wrote:
> > > After spending some hours last night and this morning hunting a bug,
> > > I've found that a different include order made a difference.  Some
> > > files don't work correctly, unless config.h is included before.
> > 
> > I'm still of the opinion that we should add
> > 
> > 	-imacros include/linux/config.h
> > 
> > to the gcc command line and stop bothering with trying to get
> > linux/config.h included into the right files and not in others.
> > (which then means we can eliminate linux/config.h from all files.)
> 
> Yes, absolutely.  That would help fixing lots of mess.

What about dependencies? Would it cause a recompile of everything if config.h
is changed?

[...]

Ah, I guess not, since config.h is filtered out of the deps anyway and replaced
by a smarter dependency on the correct CONFIG_*, right?

Gr{oetje,eeting}s,

						Geert

--
Geert Uytterhoeven -- There's lots of Linux beyond ia32 -- geert@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx

In personal conversations with technical people, I call myself a hacker. But
when I'm talking to journalists I just say "programmer" or something like that.
							    -- Linus Torvalds
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/