Re: compiling 2.4.20
On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 04:08:39PM +0200, Lars Oeschey wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 9. Juli 2003 16:06 schrieb Linus Gasser: > > > Do you use the debian-tool for compiling the kernel? Like make-kpkg? > > Yes. Or at least I try to ;) Try. It's much better :) > > Lars > > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- *** * Ionut Georgescu * http://www.physik.tu-cottbus.de/~george/ * Registered Linux User #244479 * * "In Windows you can do everything Microsoft wants you to do; in Unix you *can do anything the computer is able to do."
Re: compiling 2.4.20
theoretically, I don't see why the OS should bother if there is a real hdd on a SCSI controller or a whole array behind a RAID controller. The initrd images are loaded anyway by simple, generic ways. The only problem I could imagine is if there must be SRM support for the DAC960 (and I suppose there should be). But I'll make room for the experts here. I have never 'seen' a DAC960 controller in my life :) Ionut On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 04:03:02PM +0200, Lars Oeschey wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 9. Juli 2003 15:53 schrieb Ionut Georgescu: > > > debian already provides 2.4.21 binaries. If you want to compile them > > by yourself, I would suggest: > > I would use the precompiled one, but I guess that one again has DAC960 > support only as module, and since I boot from a Raid5 on a DAC960 I > think I need to have it compiled into the kernel. > > Lars > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- *** * Ionut Georgescu * http://www.physik.tu-cottbus.de/~george/ * Registered Linux User #244479 * * "In Windows you can do everything Microsoft wants you to do; in Unix you *can do anything the computer is able to do."
Re: compiling 2.4.20
Am Mittwoch, 9. Juli 2003 16:06 schrieb Linus Gasser: > Do you use the debian-tool for compiling the kernel? Like make-kpkg? Yes. Or at least I try to ;) Lars
Re: compiling 2.4.20
On Mercredi, 9 Juillet 2003 15.35, Lars Oeschey wrote: > Am Mittwoch, 9. Juli 2003 14:55 schrieb Falk Hueffner: > > 2.4.20 has serious bugs on Alpha, you should rather use 2.4.19 or > > 2.4.21. > > > > A bug in gcc. Which version are you using? If you're not using gcc > > 3.3, try upgrading. > > I upgraded now to 3.3 since I found a similar answer somewhere on the > net. The compile failed again somewhere else though, but I'll try > 2.4.21 then first (the odd numbers were the stable ones?). No, the even are the stable ones ;) But the even second numbers. So, 2.0.x is stable, 2.2.x is stable, 2.4.x is stable and so will be 2.6.x. The 2.4.19 and 2.4.21 being stable is more like a coincidence. IIRC, I have a 2.4.20 on my PC164... > Do I only need the kernel-source package? I saw some kernel-header > packages too... kernel-source should be enough. kernel-headers are only needed if you install the kernel-image*. If you compile from source, you automatically have the headers... Do you use the debian-tool for compiling the kernel? Like make-kpkg? Ineiti -- -- Linus Gasser Chemin des Cèdres 1 1004 Lausanne 021 647 53 05 http://www.linusetviviane.ch --
Re: compiling 2.4.20
Am Mittwoch, 9. Juli 2003 15:53 schrieb Ionut Georgescu: > debian already provides 2.4.21 binaries. If you want to compile them > by yourself, I would suggest: I would use the precompiled one, but I guess that one again has DAC960 support only as module, and since I boot from a Raid5 on a DAC960 I think I need to have it compiled into the kernel. Lars
Re: compiling 2.4.20
debian already provides 2.4.21 binaries. If you want to compile them by yourself, I would suggest: apt-get build-dep kernel-image-2.4.21-1-generic This will also download the kernel-source tar.bz2 under /usr/src. The tarball already has the debian patches applied. They are important for initrd. To get the debian .config files, run apt-get source kernel-image-2.4.21-1-generic and copy the file from the config/ directory. Ionut PS run make-kpkg with --initrd if you want to have the initrd images automatically built when installing the kernel .deb. On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 03:40:37PM +0200, Falk Hueffner wrote: > Lars Oeschey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Am Mittwoch, 9. Juli 2003 14:55 schrieb Falk Hueffner: > > > > > 2.4.20 has serious bugs on Alpha, you should rather use 2.4.19 or > > > 2.4.21. > > > > I upgraded now to 3.3 since I found a similar answer somewhere on the > > net. The compile failed again somewhere else though, but I'll try > > 2.4.21 then first (the odd numbers were the stable ones?). > > They're all supposed to be stable, only for 2.4.20 an Alpha specific > bug was introduced close to release... (it was fixed shortly after in > the -pre21 sub-releases, though). > > > Do I only need the kernel-source package? I saw some kernel-header > > packages too... > > You don't need them for compiling kernels (I think). > > -- > Falk > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] > -- *** * Ionut Georgescu * http://www.physik.tu-cottbus.de/~george/ * Registered Linux User #244479 * * "In Windows you can do everything Microsoft wants you to do; in Unix you *can do anything the computer is able to do."
Re: compiling 2.4.20
Lars Oeschey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Am Mittwoch, 9. Juli 2003 14:55 schrieb Falk Hueffner: > > > 2.4.20 has serious bugs on Alpha, you should rather use 2.4.19 or > > 2.4.21. > > I upgraded now to 3.3 since I found a similar answer somewhere on the > net. The compile failed again somewhere else though, but I'll try > 2.4.21 then first (the odd numbers were the stable ones?). They're all supposed to be stable, only for 2.4.20 an Alpha specific bug was introduced close to release... (it was fixed shortly after in the -pre21 sub-releases, though). > Do I only need the kernel-source package? I saw some kernel-header > packages too... You don't need them for compiling kernels (I think). -- Falk
Re: compiling 2.4.20
Am Mittwoch, 9. Juli 2003 14:55 schrieb Falk Hueffner: > 2.4.20 has serious bugs on Alpha, you should rather use 2.4.19 or > 2.4.21. > A bug in gcc. Which version are you using? If you're not using gcc > 3.3, try upgrading. I upgraded now to 3.3 since I found a similar answer somewhere on the net. The compile failed again somewhere else though, but I'll try 2.4.21 then first (the odd numbers were the stable ones?). Do I only need the kernel-source package? I saw some kernel-header packages too... Lars
Re: compiling 2.4.20
Lars Oeschey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > since I checked the 2.4.18 kernel-image and found out that there's no > DAC960 support (only as module) I decided to compile a new 2.4.20 > kernel. 2.4.20 has serious bugs on Alpha, you should rather use 2.4.19 or 2.4.21. > DAC960.c:1054: internal error--unrecognizable insn: > (insn 1050 1046 482 (set (reg:DI 16 $16) > (plus:DI (reg:DI 30 $30) > (const_int 4398046511104 [0x400]))) -1 (nil) > (nil)) > cpp0: output pipe has been closed > make[4]: *** [DAC960.o] Error 1 > > Anyone has an idea wht the problem is? A bug in gcc. Which version are you using? If you're not using gcc 3.3, try upgrading. -- Falk
compiling 2.4.20
Hi, since I checked the 2.4.18 kernel-image and found out that there's no DAC960 support (only as module) I decided to compile a new 2.4.20 kernel. I get the following error at compile time (make-kpkg --revision=epos.1.0 kernel_image): gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.20/include -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -mno-fp-regs -ffixed-8 -mcpu=ev5 -Wa,-mev6 -nostdinc -iwithprefix include -DKBUILD_BASENAME=DAC960 -DEXPORT_SYMTAB -c DAC960.c DAC960.c: In function `DAC960_V2_EnableMemoryMailboxInterface': DAC960.c:1054: internal error--unrecognizable insn: (insn 1050 1046 482 (set (reg:DI 16 $16) (plus:DI (reg:DI 30 $30) (const_int 4398046511104 [0x400]))) -1 (nil) (nil)) cpp0: output pipe has been closed make[4]: *** [DAC960.o] Error 1 Anyone has an idea wht the problem is? Lars
Re: what's in the kernel?
On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 10:15:34AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > Hi, > > I'm running 2.2.20 on a Alphaserver 1000A. I'm new to debian, used to have > Suse mostly. Since I trusted the "apt-get" installation, I tried a upgrade > to 2.4.18, but the machine didn't come up again (I have no root, I want to > scream). After some fiddling to get back booting the 2.2.20 kernel, I found > that the 2.4.18 installation made me a initrd.img file in the root dir, > while the old kernel seemed to have a initrd file at the same place. > Since there's no lilo (I think), where do I tell what initrd file to use? /etc/aboot.conf > And another thing is, I'm not too sure that there's Mylex DAC960 support in > the 2.4.18 kernel, and I have to boot from a raid5. How can I check what's > compiled into the kernel? /boot/config-2.4.18... Ionut -- *** * Ionut Georgescu * http://www.physik.tu-cottbus.de/~george/ * Registered Linux User #244479 * * "In Windows you can do everything Microsoft wants you to do; in Unix you *can do anything the computer is able to do."
what's in the kernel?
Hi, I'm running 2.2.20 on a Alphaserver 1000A. I'm new to debian, used to have Suse mostly. Since I trusted the "apt-get" installation, I tried a upgrade to 2.4.18, but the machine didn't come up again (I have no root, I want to scream). After some fiddling to get back booting the 2.2.20 kernel, I found that the 2.4.18 installation made me a initrd.img file in the root dir, while the old kernel seemed to have a initrd file at the same place. Since there's no lilo (I think), where do I tell what initrd file to use? And another thing is, I'm not too sure that there's Mylex DAC960 support in the 2.4.18 kernel, and I have to boot from a raid5. How can I check what's compiled into the kernel? Lars
