🚀 go-pugleaf

On Mon, 18 Jan 1999 09:28:20 +1100, DaZZa <dazza@zipper.zip.com.au>
wrote:

>On Fri, 15 Jan 1999, Loose Nut wrote:
>
>> Make isn't installed by default in RedHat? 
>
>
>Excuse me? The make executable is installed in every distribution of Linux
>I've ever installed - including RedHat, Debian, Slackware, SuSE and
>others.

Notice the question mark at the end of my sentence. It means I am
asking if this is true. I didn't make the statement, I am just
surprised make would not be installed. Punctuation makes the point!
 
>> cd /usr/src/Linux
>> make (whatever)
>> 
>> I get the same error when NOT in this directory.
>
>Then you have another problem.

No I don't, the original poster was referring to "making" a kernel!!!
I know that "make"s location should be in my path so that it can be
run from any directory. BUT, "making" the kernel is usually done from
this directory, in SLackware anyway.

>The make executable is located in either /usr/bin or /usr/local/bin in my
>distribution.

If you know what your doing, that is irrelevent.

>If you can't compile your kernel from any other directory, but you *can*
>from /usr/local/Linux, then you've got some other problem.

No, not true, in fact, having a specific directory to perform specific
tasks helps to eliminate confusion and makes it easier to solve
linking problems.

so, DaZZa not correct.

Loose Nut

___________________________________________________
"Monetary systems cannot exist without poverty."