Mark Weaver wrote:
>
> John,
>
> I was under the assumption that when you download any tarball that
> everything you need to compile the program, other than the standard C, and
> C++ libraries are included with the rest of the source code. Otherwise I
> would have grabbed the RPM. I didn't get the RPM because I wanted just to
> recompile to allow for a different sound card and installing a kernel from
> an RPM can get a little messy. Whereas booting a kernel that has been
> compiled is much cleaner and offers far more control over it and the
> system.
>
> --
> Mark
>
> /* I never worry about the to-jams.
> * Once I've stuck my foot in my mouth
> * it's already too late...just make sure
> * you chew them thoroughly before swallowing!
> */
> Registered Linux user #182496
> * Pine 4.21 *
>
> On Thu, 19 Oct 2000 1:37pm ,John Rye spake passionately in a message:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > >Is there a compilable kernel anywhere on this planet that will not bail
> > > >on your with a ridiculous error making it impossible to update or
> > > >recompile your kernel in any manner? Below is the result of my latest
> > > >attempt to configure and compile a linux kernel. This one is
> > > >2.4.0-test9. Frankly I'm beginning to think its a lost stinkin cause.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >sincerely fed up and frustrated,
> > > >
> > > >Mark
> > >
> > > Ummm....ok first you are going to have to do some digging to find out what
> > > you need for the header/include files you are missing OR if you have them
> > > ... check to see where the current tree (for the compile) is looking for
> > > them. Can you send the output from a find / -name errno.h none of what
> > > you have posted is *post* compilation and it looks like it couldn't create
> > > the .o files to link in in order to continue. Compiling isn't always as
> > > easy as "./configure, make, make install" ;-) or make make bzImage make
> > > dep make modules etc etc, trouble shoot this first by figuring out where
> > > the missing includes are or if you have them "usr/include/bits/errno.h:25:
> > > linux/errno.h: No such file or directory" (you may have to look in the
> > > Makefile(s) to see what the root dir is in order to find out "where" it
> > > thinks linux/errno.h is or what linux actually is pointing to ... its
> > > usually a sym link to the CURRENT kernel source .... ls -l should be
> > > pretty easy to work from there =o)
> > >
> > > -Lonny
> > >
> > > +++++++++++++
> > >
> > > In file included from /usr/include/errno.h:36,
> > > from scripts/split-include.c:26:
> > > /usr/include/bits/errno.h:25: linux/errno.h: No such file or directory
> > <snip>
> >
> > Did you download the matching kernal-headers?
> >
> > I had something similar when I attempted my first kernal compile
> > on 2.2.16 from a tarball.
> >
> > Cheers
> >
I agree that all should be there in the tarball as well, I don't
remember
which files the complier couldn't locate nor which files had the 'funny'
missing character errors, as I said earlier I hunted thru the files
referenced but couldn't see where the error was coming from.
Bearing mind that it's more than 10 years since I did any C programming,
it probably something very obvious to someone else. I think that
what got to me most was the errors appeared to be random from one run
to the next.
I was attempting 2.2.17 - just wouldn't go so pulled 2.2.16 down and
tried that. For what ever reason - it worked!!
Sorry mate - I don't have an answer, Maybe you need to throw this one
into the expert list?
Cheers
--
ICQ# 89345394 Mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The number of UNIX installations has grown to 10, with more expected"
(The UNIX Programmer's Manual, 2nd Edition, June 1972.)
