Re: Kernel compilation problem
I did finally get the 4.17.11 kernel to compile so that my large drives are visible now, but I had to use a 'shotgun' approach in including as many SCSI/SATA/etc variables as possible. I do intend on comparing the non-functioning config for 4.17.11 against both the functioning config, as well as against the config for 4.9.0-7-amd. Thanks. Taren On 08/02/2018 10:30 AM, David Wright wrote: On Wed 01 Aug 2018 at 23:37:33 (-0600), Taren wrote: I'm running Stretch, with kernel 4.9.0.7, and am trying to compile a new kernel (preferably 4.17.11) into which I can boot. The kernel builds successfully, but whenever I try booting into the new kernel, I end up in emergency mode, with the error Unit dev-disk-by\x2duuid-.device has failed. The result is timeout. This device is anmd device, with two mirrors (each 2.7T in size). The submirrors are present when I boot into 4.9.0.7 (installed when the system was built). However, they do not appear to be visible under any kernel which I build and try to boot into. I've tried setting LBDAF in the kernel configuration, but that requires that a 32bit kernel be built (and x64 deselected), and I'm running on an AMD 8350 chip, which is x86_64. Kernel 4.9.0.7 does not have LBDAF set (and x64 is set), yet it's able to see my 2.7T drives, and my raid device mounts with no problem. I think this is a red herring. 32bit kernels need LBDAF for large disks because they have to be told to use 64bit addressing for them. Obviously 64bit kernels don't need telling, so that option is made unavailable. Would someone point me in the correct direction for configuring a new kernel, so that my 2T+ drives are visible? In the absence of other replies, I can only suggest (a) comparing /boot/config-4.9.0-7-amd64 with the one you've built to see whether something is missing, (b) compare the output of lsinitramfs /boot/initrd.img-4.9.0-7-amd64 with the one you've built to see likewise. I'm assuming with (b) that the disks have to be found by using the initramfs before the system can continue booting with the filesystem contained on those disks. Cheers, David.
Re: Kernel compilation problem
On Wed 01 Aug 2018 at 23:37:33 (-0600), Taren wrote: > I'm running Stretch, with kernel 4.9.0.7, and am trying to compile a > new kernel (preferably 4.17.11) into which I can boot. > The kernel builds successfully, but whenever I try booting into the > new kernel, I end up in emergency mode, with the error > > Unit dev-disk-by\x2duuid-.device has failed. > > The result is timeout. > > This device is anmd device, with two mirrors (each 2.7T in size). > The submirrors are present when I boot into 4.9.0.7 (installed when > the system was built). > However, they do not appear to be visible under any kernel which I > build and try to boot into. > > I've tried setting LBDAF in the kernel configuration, but that > requires that a 32bit kernel be built (and x64 deselected), and I'm > running on an AMD 8350 chip, which is x86_64. > Kernel 4.9.0.7 does not have LBDAF set (and x64 is set), yet it's > able to see my 2.7T drives, and my raid device mounts with no > problem. I think this is a red herring. 32bit kernels need LBDAF for large disks because they have to be told to use 64bit addressing for them. Obviously 64bit kernels don't need telling, so that option is made unavailable. > Would someone point me in the correct direction for configuring a > new kernel, so that my 2T+ drives are visible? In the absence of other replies, I can only suggest (a) comparing /boot/config-4.9.0-7-amd64 with the one you've built to see whether something is missing, (b) compare the output of lsinitramfs /boot/initrd.img-4.9.0-7-amd64 with the one you've built to see likewise. I'm assuming with (b) that the disks have to be found by using the initramfs before the system can continue booting with the filesystem contained on those disks. Cheers, David.
Re: Kernel compilation problem
Correction: The kernel version I'm using (which sees my 2.7T drives) is 4.9.0-7-amd, not 4.9.0.7. I can provide the .config file for 4.17.11, if needed. On 08/01/2018 11:37 PM, Taren wrote: I'm running Stretch, with kernel 4.9.0.7, and am trying to compile a new kernel (preferably 4.17.11) into which I can boot. The kernel builds successfully, but whenever I try booting into the new kernel, I end up in emergency mode, with the error Unit dev-disk-by\x2duuid-.device has failed. The result is timeout. This device is anmd device, with two mirrors (each 2.7T in size). The submirrors are present when I boot into 4.9.0.7 (installed when the system was built). However, they do not appear to be visible under any kernel which I build and try to boot into. I've tried setting LBDAF in the kernel configuration, but that requires that a 32bit kernel be built (and x64 deselected), and I'm running on an AMD 8350 chip, which is x86_64. Kernel 4.9.0.7 does not have LBDAF set (and x64 is set), yet it's able to see my 2.7T drives, and my raid device mounts with no problem. Would someone point me in the correct direction for configuring a new kernel, so that my 2T+ drives are visible? Thanks Taren
Kernel compilation problem
I'm running Stretch, with kernel 4.9.0.7, and am trying to compile a new kernel (preferably 4.17.11) into which I can boot. The kernel builds successfully, but whenever I try booting into the new kernel, I end up in emergency mode, with the error Unit dev-disk-by\x2duuid-.device has failed. The result is timeout. This device is anmd device, with two mirrors (each 2.7T in size). The submirrors are present when I boot into 4.9.0.7 (installed when the system was built). However, they do not appear to be visible under any kernel which I build and try to boot into. I've tried setting LBDAF in the kernel configuration, but that requires that a 32bit kernel be built (and x64 deselected), and I'm running on an AMD 8350 chip, which is x86_64. Kernel 4.9.0.7 does not have LBDAF set (and x64 is set), yet it's able to see my 2.7T drives, and my raid device mounts with no problem. Would someone point me in the correct direction for configuring a new kernel, so that my 2T+ drives are visible? Thanks Taren
understanding kernel compilation and
actually i never compile or patch any kernel before for some reasons and learning i am installing kernel 3.16 stable with patch. now the question is when i visit kernel.org website i see 3.16 kernel and patch and inc.patch. i can understand what is patch it could be a fix to some bugs but what is inc.patch or incremental patch. Kernel location : https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/linux-3.16.6.tar.xz Patch location : https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/patch-3.16.6.xz inc patch : https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/incr/patch-3.16.5-6.xz any help will be highly appreciated. Thanks, Yousuf
Re: understanding kernel compilation and
On 23/10/2014 10:20, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: actually i never compile or patch any kernel before for some reasons and learning i am installing kernel 3.16 stable with patch. now the question is when i visit kernel.org website i see 3.16 kernel and patch and inc.patch. i can understand what is patch it could be a fix to some bugs but what is inc.patch or incremental patch. Kernel location : https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/linux-3.16.6.tar.xz Patch location : https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/patch-3.16.6.xz inc patch : https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/incr/patch-3.16.5-6.xz any help will be highly appreciated. Thanks, Yousuf Hello, incremental patches do what is implied by the naming, they move from one minor version in a branch to the next, patch-3.16.5-6.xz moves from 3.16.5 to 6, so has to be applied to 3.16.5 (only). Patches to 3.x.y versions are meant to be applied to the previous main version in the branch, patch-3.16.6.xz is to be applied to 3.16 sources (not 3.16.5) and will take you all the way to 3.16.6. Patches to main 3.x versions are to be applied to the previous main version 3.(x-1), for instance patch-3.16.xz is to be applied to kernel sources 3.15 You can see this in the patch itself, toward the beginning you will see a section like this: VERSION = 3 PATCHLEVEL = 16 -SUBLEVEL = 0 +SUBLEVEL = 6 You can see that in diff parlance the - minus sign before SUBLEVEL = 0 means it is removed and replaced by the line beginning with the + plus sign SUBLEVEL = 6. You may also notice that the sizes of the patches are quite different due to the amount of changes they carry. Don't forget to rename the source directory after patching to keep track of the real version of the sources. Hope it helps. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5448cfaa.7040...@googlemail.com
Re: understanding kernel compilation and
Thanks for your guidence, can you please share that i do not see kernel architecture on the website. does that kernel file contain both x86 and amd64? On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:51 PM, tv.deb...@googlemail.com tv.deb...@googlemail.com wrote: On 23/10/2014 10:20, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: actually i never compile or patch any kernel before for some reasons and learning i am installing kernel 3.16 stable with patch. now the question is when i visit kernel.org website i see 3.16 kernel and patch and inc.patch. i can understand what is patch it could be a fix to some bugs but what is inc.patch or incremental patch. Kernel location : https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/linux-3.16.6.tar.xz Patch location : https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/patch-3.16.6.xz inc patch : https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/incr/patch-3.16.5-6.xz any help will be highly appreciated. Thanks, Yousuf Hello, incremental patches do what is implied by the naming, they move from one minor version in a branch to the next, patch-3.16.5-6.xz moves from 3.16.5 to 6, so has to be applied to 3.16.5 (only). Patches to 3.x.y versions are meant to be applied to the previous main version in the branch, patch-3.16.6.xz is to be applied to 3.16 sources (not 3.16.5) and will take you all the way to 3.16.6. Patches to main 3.x versions are to be applied to the previous main version 3.(x-1), for instance patch-3.16.xz is to be applied to kernel sources 3.15 You can see this in the patch itself, toward the beginning you will see a section like this: VERSION = 3 PATCHLEVEL = 16 -SUBLEVEL = 0 +SUBLEVEL = 6 You can see that in diff parlance the - minus sign before SUBLEVEL = 0 means it is removed and replaced by the line beginning with the + plus sign SUBLEVEL = 6. You may also notice that the sizes of the patches are quite different due to the amount of changes they carry. Don't forget to rename the source directory after patching to keep track of the real version of the sources. Hope it helps. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5448cfaa.7040...@googlemail.com
Re: understanding kernel compilation and
On 23/10/14 at 03:37pm, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: Thanks for your guidence, can you please share that i do not see kernel architecture on the website. does that kernel file contain both x86 and amd64? ...of course it does. But, do you know what are you doing? -- « Nunc est bibendum, nunc pede libero pulsanda tellus » -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141023105140.ga1...@gmail.com
Re: understanding kernel compilation and
Actually the problem is i am trying to install KVM guest windows 7 64 bit. during the installation everything went well. but when guest start for the first time my KVM guest shows booting from harddirve... and struck. my /var/log/libvirt/qemu/(myguestfile) show this KVM: entry failed, hardware error 0x8021 If you're running a guest on an Intel machine without unrestricted mode support, the failure can be most likely due to the guest entering an invalid state for Intel VT. For example, the guest maybe running in big real mode which is not supported on less recent Intel processors.: my kernel is 3.2.x which comes with Wheezy as default kernel.i found this error in many places that this is a kernel bug and shall be fix if i patch or update the kernel. So my KVM host is not a production server so i thought it is a best time to play with the kernal patching because i am working on linux for years but never perform such task i always rely on default/stable debian repository but this is a first time i am doing some thing out of the box for fixing and learning purpose both so that's the whole story. if you have any other suggestion please share. Thanks, On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:51 PM, Raffaele Morelli raffaele.more...@gmail.com wrote: On 23/10/14 at 03:37pm, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: Thanks for your guidence, can you please share that i do not see kernel architecture on the website. does that kernel file contain both x86 and amd64? ...of course it does. But, do you know what are you doing? -- « Nunc est bibendum, nunc pede libero pulsanda tellus » -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141023105140.ga1...@gmail.com
Re: understanding kernel compilation and
On 23/10/2014 14:22, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: Actually the problem is i am trying to install KVM guest windows 7 64 bit. during the installation everything went well. but when guest start for the first time my KVM guest shows booting from harddirve... and struck. my /var/log/libvirt/qemu/(myguestfile) show this KVM: entry failed, hardware error 0x8021 If you're running a guest on an Intel machine without unrestricted mode support, the failure can be most likely due to the guest entering an invalid state for Intel VT. For example, the guest maybe running in big real mode which is not supported on less recent Intel processors.: my kernel is 3.2.x which comes with Wheezy as default kernel.i found this error in many places that this is a kernel bug and shall be fix if i patch or update the kernel. So my KVM host is not a production server so i thought it is a best time to play with the kernal patching because i am working on linux for years but never perform such task i always rely on default/stable debian repository but this is a first time i am doing some thing out of the box for fixing and learning purpose both so that's the whole story. if you have any other suggestion please share. Thanks, I don't know about this specific error, but if you want to try a newer kernel for Wheezy may I suggest starting with the Debian backport [1] kernel ? It's a lot easier and less error prone, plus you won't have to recompile the kernel every time a new kernel comes out to get the fixes. [1] http://backports.debian.org/ http://backports.debian.org/Instructions/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/5448ecaf.1060...@gmail.com
Re: understanding kernel compilation and
Muhammad Yousuf Khan sir...@gmail.com writes: So my KVM host is not a production server so i thought it is a best time to play with the kernal patching because i am working on linux for years but never perform such task i always rely on default/stable debian repository but this is a first time i am doing some thing out of the box for fixing and learning purpose both I think it's great that you're starting to learn how to work with the kernel. You had a question earlier about x86 vs. amd64 support and the answer is that the kernel supports both architectures depending on how it's configured. There's a lot of information out there to help folks get started building kernels and a great one to start with is Linux Kernel Newbies [1]. If you have questions or get stuck on the actual build process you may want to try using their mailing list or IRC channel. [1]: http://kernelnewbies.org/ The Gentoo handbook [2] is also a great resource. It's written with running Gentoo in mind but the build process that it goes over is somewhat applicable to generic kernels as well. [2]: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-amd64.xml?part=1chap=7 -- Devrin Talen dc...@cornell.edu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/87vbnb2dq4@cornell.edu
Re: understanding kernel compilation and
Thanks Dervin, for the encouragement and it is really nice to know that there is a community exist for newbies as well.i will definitly start working on your given information it is very helpful. just sharing to all after lots of efforts and updates nothing has achieved so far. started a new email trail. Qemu-kvm problem, no guest is starting on windows 7 64 bit :( On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 5:05 PM, Devrin Talen dc...@cornell.edu wrote: Muhammad Yousuf Khan sir...@gmail.com writes: So my KVM host is not a production server so i thought it is a best time to play with the kernal patching because i am working on linux for years but never perform such task i always rely on default/stable debian repository but this is a first time i am doing some thing out of the box for fixing and learning purpose both I think it's great that you're starting to learn how to work with the kernel. You had a question earlier about x86 vs. amd64 support and the answer is that the kernel supports both architectures depending on how it's configured. There's a lot of information out there to help folks get started building kernels and a great one to start with is Linux Kernel Newbies [1]. If you have questions or get stuck on the actual build process you may want to try using their mailing list or IRC channel. [1]: http://kernelnewbies.org/ The Gentoo handbook [2] is also a great resource. It's written with running Gentoo in mind but the build process that it goes over is somewhat applicable to generic kernels as well. [2]: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-amd64.xml?part=1chap=7 -- Devrin Talen dc...@cornell.edu
Re: understanding kernel compilation and
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 03:20:36 -0400 (EDT), Muhammad Yousuf wrote: actually i never compile or patch any kernel before for some reasons and learning i am installing kernel 3.16 stable with patch. now the question is when i visit kernel.org website i see 3.16 kernel and patch and inc.patch. i can understand what is patch it could be a fix to some bugs but what is inc.patch or incremental patch. Kernel location : https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/linux-3.16.6.tar.xz Patch location : https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/patch-3.16.6.xz inc patch : https://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v3.x/incr/patch-3.16.5-6.xz any help will be highly appreciated. If you intend to compile a custom kernel, and you've never done it before, I would suggest that you start here: http://users.wowway.com/~zlinuxman/Kernel.htm -- .''`. Stephen Powellzlinux...@wowway.com : :' : `. `'` `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/1447628788.8589810.1414083839681.javamail.zim...@wowway.com
Re: understanding kernel compilation and
Please don't top post on this mailing list. On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 04:22:30PM +0500, Muhammad Yousuf Khan wrote: Actually the problem is i am trying to install KVM guest windows 7 64 bit. during the installation everything went well. but when guest start for the first time my KVM guest shows booting from harddirve... and struck. my /var/log/libvirt/qemu/(myguestfile) show this KVM: entry failed, hardware error 0x8021 If you're running a guest on an Intel machine without unrestricted mode support, the failure can be most likely due to the guest entering an invalid state for Intel VT. For example, the guest maybe running in big real mode which is not supported on less recent Intel processors.: my kernel is 3.2.x which comes with Wheezy as default kernel.i found this error in many places that this is a kernel bug and shall be fix if i patch or update the kernel. That is what you should have written the first time. That is the problem you want help with, right? It becomes awkward when you are trying to solve the wrong problem. -- If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. --- Malcolm X -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20141023172141.GH4458@tal
RE: kernel compilation (was ... Re: Building computer)
On 29 September 2013 02:41, Chris Bannister cbannis...@slingshot.co.nz wrote: On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 11:57:43PM -0300, Beco wrote: On 26 September 2013 22:22, Tom H tomh0...@gmail.com wrote: (I've compiled a kernel on a netbook; you'd better have a few hours to spare...) Questions for people who compile kernel and their machines: You are better off starting a new thread. You could create a subtopic by changing the subject. Now unfortunately, information about compiling a kernel is buried in a thread about building a computer. :( From the thread Building computer, I've asked: On Thu, 2013-09-26 at 23:57 -0300, Beco wrote: How long a considered fast kernel compilation would last? I'd like to have a clue. And in what kind of computer (processor / RAM / anything else relevant)? And I got some good answers that is better to join this thread: Just to dig it: Answer from Ralf: https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2013/09/msg01204.html From Stan: https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2013/09/msg01212.html From Johnatan: https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2013/09/msg01213.html From Tom: https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2013/09/msg01214.html From Stephen: https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2013/09/msg01245.html From Stan: https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2013/09/msg01285.html Also, the thread Building a computer for compiling and CPU emulation (Re: Building computer) https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2013/09/msg01317.html Started by Joel Rees now looks like a duplicate. Please, join here. Thanks. Beco. -- Dr Beco A.I. researcher Sometimes the heart sees what is invisible to the eye. (H. Jackson Brown Jr.) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CALuYw2zBs+KqpPAwf5T-FzgzjiZq8Vnrq8aMgBCohJUM1i=2...@mail.gmail.com
kernel compilation (was ... Re: Building computer)
On Thu, Sep 26, 2013 at 11:57:43PM -0300, Beco wrote: On 26 September 2013 22:22, Tom H tomh0...@gmail.com wrote: (I've compiled a kernel on a netbook; you'd better have a few hours to spare...) Questions for people who compile kernel and their machines: You are better off starting a new thread. You could create a subtopic by changing the subject. Now unfortunately, information about compiling a kernel is buried in a thread about building a computer. :( There are plenty of examples where someone has interrupted a conversation in a thread: e.g. Subject: How do you cook brocolli? (was Re: dpkg errors out installing...) -- If you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing. --- Malcolm X -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20130929054152.GK18437@tal
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Mon, 26 Sep 2011 01:41:10 - Cam Hutchison c...@xdna.net wrote: David Witbrodt dawit...@sbcglobal.net writes: (My goal was to produce a kernel that boots without an initrd; most people will not share that goal.) I would have thought that most people would share that goal, since building an initrd is useful for only two reasons I can think of: ... 2) You have a complex method of getting the root filesystem mounted - perhaps encrypted LVM on top of a network block device, etc, etc, etc. I use a simple (relative to your example, at least) setup, with an unencrypted boot and everything else on top of LVM on top of an encrypted PV. Is there some way to do this without an initrd? The docs, such as they are, generally recommend using an initrd for booting from encrypted storage, even when not dealing with the sort of complexity you describe, e.g.: http://www.debian-administration.org/articles/577 Since most people who are building their own kernels probably do not have either of these requirements, building without an initrd would make things a lot simpler. I looked into building an initrd with my kernel builds, but it just made things more complicated and I could not see the point. Is there some other reason to use an initrd when building your own customized kernels? suspend / resume from disk should really be done via an initrd; from the docs: (c) The kernel should be configured with CONFIG_BLK_DEV_INITRD=y, which will allow you to run the resume binary out of an iniramfs/initrd image. [It is possible to use the suspend tools without any initramfs/initrd images, but it's dangerous and will not be documented here.] Celejar -- foffl.sourceforge.net - Feeds OFFLine, an offline RSS/Atom aggregator mailmin.sourceforge.net - remote access via secure (OpenPGP) email ssuds.sourceforge.net - A Simple Sudoku Solver and Generator -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110928102315.acf833bc7cd52bae1e60d...@gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
Cam Hutchison: (My goal was to produce a kernel that boots without an initrd; most people will not share that goal.) I would have thought that most people would share that goal, since building an initrd is useful for only two reasons I can think of: I regularly built custom kernels for a few years and in the beginning, I avoided initrds as well. But nowadays you don't have to do very much to get it working. You just enable it in the kernel config and the rest is done automatically (I use deb-pkg). J. -- I like my Toyota RAV4 because of the commanding view of the traffic jams. [Agree] [Disagree] http://www.slowlydownward.com/NODATA/data_enter2.html signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: (Results) Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 4:21 PM, Camaleón noela...@gmail.com wrote: On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 14:22:33 +, Camaleón wrote: Okay, let's get the numbers. I followed Sven and Stephen's advice so I: - Used make localmodconfig to generate the .config file - Appended CONCURRENCY_LEVEL=2 to make-kpkg - Added CONFIG_MATOM=y (just in case...) - Removed the aforementioned CONFIG_LGUEST_GUEST, CONFIG_LGUEST and CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS options from the .config file This compilation round started at 18:56 and when I came back (at 21:05) the process was already finished... So what time it took? I should have used time to monitor the proccess (my bad) but the generated .deb file says it was last changed and modified at 20:07. If I were you, I'd use make menuconfig to set/unset the values that you set manually. You can find them with /MATOM (for CONFIG_MATOM) with the menuconfig screen. If you'd like to find out what's probably the fastest that you can compile a kernel on your netbook make defconfig will give you a pretty small (and almost certainly useless for your purposes) kernel config. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOdo=SxUvKia5v_=akFq=qajkzk-nd9-qgsgjuo-qb5e1jl...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com wrote: On 9/25/2011 11:02 AM, Camaleón wrote: On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 10:18:53 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: Simply go through all the hardware and deselect anything that's not inside that netbook. Of all the network interface cards you'll only need one (or two depending on whether that netbook has an RJ45 port in addition to the wireless NIC). You'll only need one of the dozens of IDE/SATA drivers. You won't need any of the SCSI/RAID or legacy block drivers, though you will need SCSI disk and SCSI CDROM, as libata needs those, as Stephen and I recently discussed. That's easy to say but hard to get and so much for a trial/error test. It's definitely more difficult for non-hardwarefreaks. But honestly, if one isn't a hardwarefreak s/he really has no business rolling his/her own kernel. The entire concept of an operating system kernel is to abstract the hardware from user applications. This concept is over 40 years old. Some 90+% of the Linux kernel code deals with programming and communicating with the hardware. So you really need to know a bit about hardware if you're going to roll your own kernels. Whilst I agree that being a hardware freak might make choosing the right kernel config settings, it's not a must. I've been compiling kernels for a while and I'm definitely not a hardware freak; in fact, one of the most satisfying aspects of my job for the last eight or nine years is that I haven't seen a server room (unless I'm moonlighting in an SME) and don't have to deal with hardware except when I ask the hardware boys and girls to change a failing disk or ram module or check the cabling or install/remove a box or ... Over the years, I've never had the need to compile a kernel and this is my 4 kernel compilation in one month... but now I'm making these tests just for fun because all these compilations were aimed to debug the staging wifi drivers but the latest kernel (3.1-rc7, which I tried yesterday) neither worked. One of the biggest problems I see people having with both wired and wireless ethernet controllers is not getting the firmware loaded. Recall the big row on this list about the Realtek 8111/8168 etc? Debian didn't included the firmware in the Debian kernel tree due to Realtek ambiguity on the source license. Thus I recommend to anyone rolling a kernel to use a vanilla/pristine tarball which includes all the firmware blobs, and to build the blobs into your kernel. Also, build fixed hardware drivers into the kernel, not as modules. Fixed meaning non-removable, as in soldered to the system board, such as SATA, wireless ethernet, USB, etc in your netbook. The option to build firmware into the kernel is: CONFIG_FIRMWARE_IN_KERNEL=y Description: http://cateee.net/lkddb/web-lkddb/FIRMWARE_IN_KERNEL.html The only downside is that this adds a few kilobytes to your kernel binary. In my experience this is easier than the recommended way to include firmware, and it's foolproof as long as the firmware is in the source tree. Most are. +1 The catee site above is very useful to find out what various kernel config settings are. But you can also get that info by choosing help for an entry in menuconfig. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOdo=swggkctnhofpfphfyuoeog1nsajdrckyeyemreyokx...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 7:26 PM, Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote: I will continue to use and recommend kernel-package. But I'm not going to argue with those who wish to use make deb-pkg. It's all a question of habit. If I need to have a package, I use make-dpkg on Debian distribs and rpmbuild on Red Hat distribs. If I don't need a package, I use make. I could start using make deb-pkg (why not make deb or make dpkg?!) and make rpm - and I might in the future - but this is working for me and this is what I'm now used to. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOdo=sxycq-jn5msebnvuzdr0rlw3po8+jsyumguhuh+x8m...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 16:13:58 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: On 9/25/2011 11:02 AM, Camaleón wrote: (...) Simply go through all the hardware and deselect anything that's not inside that netbook. Of all the network interface cards you'll only need one (or two depending on whether that netbook has an RJ45 port in addition to the wireless NIC). You'll only need one of the dozens of IDE/SATA drivers. You won't need any of the SCSI/RAID or legacy block drivers, though you will need SCSI disk and SCSI CDROM, as libata needs those, as Stephen and I recently discussed. That's easy to say but hard to get and so much for a trial/error test. It's definitely more difficult for non-hardwarefreaks. I'd say it is so for anyone that never has compiled his/her own kernel. First time is always hard, regardless the task you have in hands. But honestly, if one isn't a hardwarefreak s/he really has no business rolling his/her own kernel. The entire concept of an operating system kernel is to abstract the hardware from user applications. This concept is over 40 years old. Some 90+% of the Linux kernel code deals with programming and communicating with the hardware. So you really need to know a bit about hardware if you're going to roll your own kernels. As I said earlier, I never had a deep reason to compile my own kernel until now, that my wifi card stopped from working since kernel 2.6.39, that is, since 3.0.0 branch and upwards. The involved function that has been added to the wifi driver has been detected and I was given a workaround but I still need to be able to test another things and that involves adding debug trace for the stating drivers, which involves a kernel compilation. Do an lspci and write down all the hardware you have in there. The strip out all the drivers you don't have. If you're unsure, ask. I'm using Sven's advice (in join with Stephen's one), I find it a very good approach. Pick your poison. My point is simply that you need to know what hardware is in the machine so you can include the drivers you need and leave out those you don't. Yes, I know that, but is not an easy task, even for not-so-newbie people. Over the years, I've never had the need to compile a kernel and this is my 4 kernel compilation in one month... but now I'm making these tests just for fun because all these compilations were aimed to debug the staging wifi drivers but the latest kernel (3.1-rc7, which I tried yesterday) neither worked. One of the biggest problems I see people having with both wired and wireless ethernet controllers is not getting the firmware loaded. (...) Not related to this problem, I guess. I'm in talks with one of the driver devels that kindly is helping me to track this. The option to build firmware into the kernel is: CONFIG_FIRMWARE_IN_KERNEL=y Description: http://cateee.net/lkddb/web-lkddb/FIRMWARE_IN_KERNEL.html The only downside is that this adds a few kilobytes to your kernel binary. In my experience this is easier than the recommended way to include firmware, and it's foolproof as long as the firmware is in the source tree. Most are. Good to know. But that would still leave out the closed source drivers or proprietary blob, right? Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.26.11.10...@gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 9:41 PM, Cam Hutchison c...@xdna.net wrote: David Witbrodt dawit...@sbcglobal.net writes: (My goal was to produce a kernel that boots without an initrd; most people will not share that goal.) I would have thought that most people would share that goal, since building an initrd is useful for only two reasons I can think of: 1) You are building a distro kernel that needs to run on many different types of machines, since you don't know what modules would need to be built in to find the root filesystem. 2) You have a complex method of getting the root filesystem mounted - perhaps encrypted LVM on top of a network block device, etc, etc, etc. Since most people who are building their own kernels probably do not have either of these requirements, building without an initrd would make things a lot simpler. I looked into building an initrd with my kernel builds, but it just made things more complicated and I could not see the point. Is there some other reason to use an initrd when building your own customized kernels? 3) AFAIK, a initrd is needed for selinux. AFAIK! It's definitely the case with upstart and systemd; I've never tried using selinux without an initrd on RHEL 5 or an older Fedora, so it's maybe not the case with sysvinit; although I can't see, off-hand, why it would work in the latter case if it fails in the former two. 4) If you have /usr on its own partition and don't want to have some non-fatal errors and warning, you have to mount it in the initrd. http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken [5) On Ubuntu, if you have /var on its own partition and don't want ureadahead to fail (or have to turn it off), you have to mount it in the initrd.] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOdo=SynmvR3aK7nsayX4+yjMtV0=CHbRc+CATtkwXpdCKdF=a...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
* Stephen Powell [110924 14:13 -0400]: On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 12:18:47 -0400 (EDT), Camaleón wrote: What do you mean by kernel-package? Debian's vanilla kernel? kernel-package is the name of a Debian package, as in aptitude install kernel-package Isn't [1] the proper way to build Debian kernels? [1] http://kernel-handbook.alioth.debian.org/ch-common-tasks.html Elimar -- Alles was viel bedacht wird ist bedenklich!;-) Friedrich Nietzsche -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110925074224.ga2...@samweis.home.lxtec.de
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On 9/24/2011 6:55 PM, Stephen Powell wrote: On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 17:15:51 -0400 (EDT), Stan Hoeppner wrote: 5 hours? Did you say 5 hours? I have a 10 year old dual Mendocino 550 machine with only 384MB of PC100 that takes about 30 minutes to compile my custom kernels using make -j2. I'd guess you're including the kitchen sink. Don't build the hundreds of driver modules your machines won't ever use. That is the key to reducing build time. +1 Absolutely, Stan. Building a lean and mean kernel, one which only contains what the machine needs, is where the big savings are. But configuring the kernel to do that takes time. And it is easy to make a mistake. For example, I've learned from experience that I need SCSI support in my kernel, even though I have no SCSI adapter in my machine. So much stuff emulates SCSI now, or uses SCSI protocols in communication. I'd bet that omitting the SCSI layer hamstrung many folks who tried to use libata for the first time. It got me too. :) It forced me to go and read up on how libata works, so it wasn't all bad. -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e7ede11.5060...@hardwarefreak.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On 9/25/2011 2:42 AM, Elimar Riesebieter wrote: * Stephen Powell [110924 14:13 -0400]: On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 12:18:47 -0400 (EDT), Camaleón wrote: What do you mean by kernel-package? Debian's vanilla kernel? kernel-package is the name of a Debian package, as in aptitude install kernel-package Isn't [1] the proper way to build Debian kernels? [1] http://kernel-handbook.alioth.debian.org/ch-common-tasks.html As has already been discussed, this is the new recommended way to build a Debian kernel. The instructions on that page 'silently' changed not terribly that long ago. The build instructions on that page used to tell us to use 'make-kpkg'. Note that this new method make KDEB_PKGVERSION=custom.1.0 deb-pkg did not exist in the days of 2.6.18 to 2.6.21, which is when these command line examples were written. IIRC this deb-pkg method was introduced in kernel 2.6.32 or 2.6.34. It is included in the pristine kernel kernel source tarball. Thus you don't have to install any Debian kernel building packages on your system in order to build a custom kernel. This is likely one of the reasons this is the recommended method now, since most everything you need is in the vanilla tarball. -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e7ee1ca.10...@hardwarefreak.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 2:20 PM, Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote: On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 13:56:35 -0400 (EDT), Tom H wrote: CONCURRENCY_LEVEL=$(getconf _NPROCESSORS_ONLN) although getconf _NPROCESSORS_ONLN on an atom's probably 1; but you never know... You can also pass INSTALL_MOD_STRIP=1 to make-kpkg so that the make modules_install step strips out debugging information (if this isn't done by default). Thanks for the tips, Tom! I believe I'll incorporate one or both of those tips during the next revision of my kernel-building web page. You're very welcome. Should kernel-package ever be EOLd you could look into the fakeroot debian/rules... way of compiling a kernel that both the Debian and Ubuntu kernel teams seem to be promoting if you use their sources. From what little I've read about this method, it doesn't seem to have the equivalent of make-kpg's kernel_image target so it might have the same deficiency as make deb-pkg from your perspective... I was re-reading the make-kpkg to see whether there were targets with or without debugging symbols and found kernel_debug: kernel_debug This target produces a Debian package containing the debugging symbols for the modules contained in the corresponding image package. The basic idea here is to keep the space in /lib/mod- ules/kver under control, since this could be on a root parti- tion with space restrictions. So, if you create a linux-image package with debug info stripped out, you can later create a package with just the unstripped modules rather than recompile a complete package. The man page doesn't specify where these modules would be installed. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOdo=swyo0xv8qoss_rzasytauho064v0mf93p8m+p_axum...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 14:13:57 -0400, Stephen Powell wrote: On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 12:18:47 -0400 (EDT), Camaleón wrote: What do you mean by kernel-package? Debian's vanilla kernel? kernel-package is the name of a Debian package, as in aptitude install kernel-package It is not a kernel. It is a collection of scripts, configuration files, etc. that are intended to aid in the process of compiling a kernel and building a Debian binary kernel package. The make-kpkg command is one of the scripts in the kernel-package package. Ah, then yes :-) In fact, I already have a set of tools installed (along with fakeroot, that kernel-package) because I'm following Debian Installation Guide instructions: http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/en.i386/ch08s06.html (there is a little bug there. --revision= string has to start with a number or it won't compile...) No, sources have to be from upstream. kernel-package can be used with official Debian kernel source packages or with pristine kernel sources acquired directly from upstream. When using upstream kernel sources directly, one cannot use the Debian package version in the --revision option, since there is no Debian package version. You have to make one up. Other than that, it works just fine for upstream kernel sources. I've done it before, and for similar reasons as you. Yes, yes... that's what I have been doing. Then I can try your suggestion, in addition with the new make localmodconfig that is running right now. Yes... I've already¹ walked through that link, and it's fantastic for Debian starters, very well explained with detailed steps (have you considered adding it into Debian's wiki, or at least -if not the full article- a link to it?) ¹I noticed you pointed to it in another thread where someone asked for something similar ;-) The Debian kernel team seems to think that kernel-package should be considered deprecated. (Although, as far as I know, the author of kernel-package does not share that opinion.) Therefore, I'm not sure that my kernel-building stuff would be welcome in the official wiki. The kernel team encourages the use of make deb-pkg. But I personally don't like make deb-pkg because of its one size fits all build philosophy. For example, it always produces a headers package, and I often don't need a headers package. With kernel-package, I only get the packages that I ask for. And since your goal is to reduce kernel compilation time, I would think that you would not want extra packages produced that you don't need. That takes additional time. I also found very easy to compile a new kernel from whatever source by using the mentioned package, and in fact, it is suggested in the install manual so they better remove the current instructions if want people use another method but until then, I will keep using it :-P If you decide to try kernel-package, make sure that you apply the patch file listed in the web page. It won't work properly with a version 3 kernel unless you do. Hum... you mean the one for EDID? I've compiled 3 kernels just fine and had to do nothing special :-? Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.25.11.53...@gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 03:42:24 -0400 (EDT), Elimar Riesebieter wrote: Isn't [1] the proper way to build Debian kernels? [1] http://kernel-handbook.alioth.debian.org/ch-common-tasks.html That depends on your definition of proper. The kernel handbook, not surprisingly, is maintained by the Debian kernel team. The Debian kernel team is responsible for producing the official Debian stock binary kernels as well as making any Debian customization to the pristine kernel sources that they deem necessary or desirable. If your definition of proper means the way the kernel team currently recommends, then yes. However, with apologies to cat lovers, there's an old American saying: There's more than one way to skin a cat. The method documented on my web page is the historic method, and was also the method used by the Debian kernel team to create official Debian stock kernel images up through and including Sarge. The kernel team departed from the historic method of producing stock kernels with Etch, it seems. As I said in an earlier post, I still prefer the historic method because I find it more flexible. For example, when using make deb-pkg, three binary packages are produced: a linux-image-* package, a linux-headers-* package, and a linux-libc6-dev package. In most cases, I only need and want the linux-image-* package. With make deb-pkg, it doesn't appear that there is any way to suppress the creation of the unneeded packages. With make-kpkg, I only get the packages that I ask for. Another benefit of the historic method is that header packages are rarely needed. If the entire kernel source tree is already installed, header packages should not be needed, since the kernel headers are included as part of the kernel source. The historic method of creating kernel module binary packages takes advantage of this fact and therefore does not require a separate headers package. The new way of creating kernel modules requires a headers package, even if the entire kernel source tree is already installed. This is all explained in my web page, which, for reference, is http://users.wowway.com/~zlinuxman/Kernel.htm But, to each his own. Whatever floats your boat, man. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/980275088.2101929.1316953277845.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Camaleón noela...@gmail.com wrote: In fact, I already have a set of tools installed (along with fakeroot, that kernel-package) because I'm following Debian Installation Guide instructions: http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/en.i386/ch08s06.html There's also the kernel handbook: http://kernel-handbook.alioth.debian.org/ch-common-tasks.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOdo=Sy-c34jQLGu=aYg4oAdk9i2R=g8vqktudoefksy5jh...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 07:53:59 -0400 (EDT), Camaleón wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: If you decide to try kernel-package, make sure that you apply the patch file listed in the web page. It won't work properly with a version 3 kernel unless you do. Hum... you mean the one for EDID? I've compiled 3 kernels just fine and had to do nothing special :-? No, I mean ... - If you are using kernel-package version 12.036+nmu1 with a Linux version 3 kernel source package, there is a patch you will need to apply, especially if CONFIG_LGUEST is set in the kernel config file or you need to build doc or headers packages. The patch is available here. To apply the patch, issue the following sequence of commands: cd /usr/share/kernel-package ... (download the patch file to the current directory) patch -p1 linuxv3.diff This is an unofficial patch: it is not provided by or endorsed by the upstream author or the Debian package maintainer. - Follow the link on the word here in the above text in my web page. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/255335842.2101986.1316953836438.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 08:30:36 -0400, Stephen Powell wrote: On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 07:53:59 -0400 (EDT), Camaleón wrote: Stephen Powell wrote: If you decide to try kernel-package, make sure that you apply the patch file listed in the web page. It won't work properly with a version 3 kernel unless you do. Hum... you mean the one for EDID? I've compiled 3 kernels just fine and had to do nothing special :-? No, I mean ... - If you are using kernel-package version 12.036+nmu1 with a Linux version 3 kernel source package, there is a patch you will need to apply, especially if CONFIG_LGUEST is set in the kernel config file or you need to build doc or headers packages. The patch is available here. To apply the patch, issue the following sequence of commands: cd /usr/share/kernel-package ... (download the patch file to the current directory) patch -p1 linuxv3.diff This is an unofficial patch: it is not provided by or endorsed by the upstream author or the Debian package maintainer. - Follow the link on the word here in the above text in my web page. Ah, that (the missing documentation folder). Yes, that's something I noticed too late the first time I run the compilation, it stopped at the middle of the task but googling around a bit I could discover the cause. In brief: CONFIG_LGUEST_GUEST=n CONFIG_LGUEST=n CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS=n Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.25.12.57...@gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 08:25:19 -0400, Tom H wrote: On Sun, Sep 25, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Camaleón noela...@gmail.com wrote: In fact, I already have a set of tools installed (along with fakeroot, that kernel-package) because I'm following Debian Installation Guide instructions: http://d-i.alioth.debian.org/manual/en.i386/ch08s06.html There's also the kernel handbook: http://kernel-handbook.alioth.debian.org/ch-common-tasks.html It seems there is more than one oficial version on how to bake a cake (something that's very common in the FLOSS world) so I applied the first I found which by the way, it worked fine. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.25.13.06...@gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 16:15:51 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: On 9/24/2011 9:22 AM, Camaleón wrote: (...) I don't need nothing special, just to be able to boot the system, test the staging drivers and then remove/compile a new kernel again so wasting the less time in the process would be great :-) Any trick? 5 hours? Did you say 5 hours? Yes Stan, I said five hours. I have a 10 year old dual Mendocino 550 machine with only 384MB of PC100 that takes about 30 minutes to compile my custom kernels using make -j2. Marvellous. I'd guess you're including the kitchen sink. Don't build the hundreds of driver modules your machines won't ever use. That is the key to reducing build time. Fair enough, but I wonder what to include in the recipe. If I put too much salt or leave the oven for many hours at the maximun temperature I'll get a pastiche nobody will be able to eat... So I'm afraid I'll wait for your super-customized .config file to use it in my netbook, feel free to send it to my inbox when it's ready :-) Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.25.14.30...@gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sun 25 Sep 2011 at 08:21:17 -0400, Stephen Powell wrote: [Snipped: Some advantages of using kernel-package] But, to each his own. Whatever floats your boat, man. Indeed, but the deck is stacked against kernel-package when it is associated with 'deprecated' in the minds of users. It may not suit the Kernel Team for their use but I've happily and successfully compiled kernels with it for many years without it giving me any problems. Kernel-package was promoted as the Debian way when I first came into contact with it and its creator was active in debian-user with advice. If there is a proper or official Debian position on compiling a kernel it could be inferred from this civilised discussion at: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=599208 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110925142709.GA6253@desktop
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
From: Camaleón noela...@gmail.com Sent: Sun, September 25, 2011 10:30:30 AM Subject: Re: Reducing kernel compilation time I'd guess you're including the kitchen sink. Don't build the hundreds of driver modules your machines won't ever use. That is the key to reducing build time. Fair enough, but I wonder what to include in the recipe. If I put too much salt or leave the oven for many hours at the maximun temperature I'll get a pastiche nobody will be able to eat... So I'm afraid I'll wait for your super-customized .config file to use it in my netbook, feel free to send it to my inbox when it's ready :-) He cannot. Everyone needs a different '.config' if they are trying to customize for their own personal hardware. My own experience with this involved spending an entire day in January 2010 tracking down which options I could disable. I also changed most 'M' options to 'Y' so that drivers would be built directly into the kernel instead of as a separate loadable module. (My goal was to produce a kernel that boots without an initrd; most people will not share that goal.) Sven Joachim's suggestion to create a new '.config' using 'make localmonconfig' should mostly have the desired effect, the result could then be fine-tuned. If that option had existed when I was learning about this, it would have saved me many, many hours! Good luck! Dave W. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1316963813.47885.yahoomai...@web82102.mail.mud.yahoo.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On 9/25/2011 9:30 AM, Camaleón wrote: Fair enough, but I wonder what to include in the recipe. If I put too much salt or leave the oven for many hours at the maximun temperature I'll get a pastiche nobody will be able to eat... Have you used make-menuconfig? Simply go through all the hardware and deselect anything that's not inside that netbook. Of all the network interface cards you'll only need one (or two depending on whether that netbook has an RJ45 port in addition to the wireless NIC). You'll only need one of the dozens of IDE/SATA drivers. You won't need any of the SCSI/RAID or legacy block drivers, though you will need SCSI disk and SCSI CDROM, as libata needs those, as Stephen and I recently discussed. Do an lspci and write down all the hardware you have in there. The strip out all the drivers you don't have. If you're unsure, ask. And be patient with yourself. Nearly everyone who embarks on the roll your own journey trips a few times along the way, and has a steep learning curve in the beginning. So I'm afraid I'll wait for your super-customized .config file to use it in my netbook, feel free to send it to my inbox when it's ready:-) Don't hold your breath. :) -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e7f465d.6090...@hardwarefreak.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On 9/25/2011 10:16 AM, David Witbrodt wrote: If that option had existed when I was learning about this, it would have saved me many, many hours! But then you wouldn't have learned as much. Easier is not always better, even though it often seems so. -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e7f4851.1070...@hardwarefreak.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 08:16:53 -0700, David Witbrodt wrote: From: Camaleón noela...@gmail.com Sent: Sun, September 25, 2011 10:30:30 AM Subject: Re: Reducing kernel compilation time I'd guess you're including the kitchen sink. Don't build the hundreds of driver modules your machines won't ever use. That is the key to reducing build time. Fair enough, but I wonder what to include in the recipe. If I put too much salt or leave the oven for many hours at the maximun temperature I'll get a pastiche nobody will be able to eat... So I'm afraid I'll wait for your super-customized .config file to use it in my netbook, feel free to send it to my inbox when it's ready :-) He cannot. Everyone needs a different '.config' if they are trying to customize for their own personal hardware. (...) Ains... I should have said it was a joke but I hoped the devil smily :-) was just going to be enough. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.25.15.52...@gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 10:18:53 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: On 9/25/2011 9:30 AM, Camaleón wrote: Fair enough, but I wonder what to include in the recipe. If I put too much salt or leave the oven for many hours at the maximun temperature I'll get a pastiche nobody will be able to eat... Have you used make-menuconfig? Nope. I first used the current .config located at /boot, that way I could not fail. Simply go through all the hardware and deselect anything that's not inside that netbook. Of all the network interface cards you'll only need one (or two depending on whether that netbook has an RJ45 port in addition to the wireless NIC). You'll only need one of the dozens of IDE/SATA drivers. You won't need any of the SCSI/RAID or legacy block drivers, though you will need SCSI disk and SCSI CDROM, as libata needs those, as Stephen and I recently discussed. That's easy to say but hard to get and so much for a trial/error test. Do an lspci and write down all the hardware you have in there. The strip out all the drivers you don't have. If you're unsure, ask. I'm using Sven's advice (in join with Stephen's one), I find it a very good approach. And be patient with yourself. Nearly everyone who embarks on the roll your own journey trips a few times along the way, and has a steep learning curve in the beginning. Over the years, I've never had the need to compile a kernel and this is my 4 kernel compilation in one month... but now I'm making these tests just for fun because all these compilations were aimed to debug the staging wifi drivers but the latest kernel (3.1-rc7, which I tried yesterday) neither worked. So I'm afraid I'll wait for your super-customized .config file to use it in my netbook, feel free to send it to my inbox when it's ready:-) Don't hold your breath. :) Ha! I knew it :-) Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.25.16.02...@gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
From: Stan Hoeppner s...@hardwarefreak.com Sent: Sun, September 25, 2011 11:27:13 AM Subject: Re: Reducing kernel compilation time If that option had existed when I was learning about this, it would have saved me many, many hours! But then you wouldn't have learned as much. Easier is not always better, even though it often seems so. I take your point. I was actually reading about every single kernel option in a .config file, though, so the time I was thinking would have been saved would only have had to do with arriving more quickly at my custom .config, not on the learning about the options. But I fully agree with the truism: easier is not always better. DW -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1316970512.93510.yahoomai...@web82105.mail.mud.yahoo.com
(Results) Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 14:22:33 +, Camaleón wrote: (...) Any trick? Yes, I got many useful tricks, a big thanks to all. Okay, let's get the numbers. I followed Sven and Stephen's advice so I: - Used make localmodconfig to generate the .config file - Appended CONCURRENCY_LEVEL=2 to make-kpkg - Added CONFIG_MATOM=y (just in case...) - Removed the aforementioned CONFIG_LGUEST_GUEST, CONFIG_LGUEST and CONFIG_PARAVIRT_SPINLOCKS options from the .config file This compilation round started at 18:56 and when I came back (at 21:05) the process was already finished... Wow, I didn't expect that. So what time it took? I should have used time to monitor the proccess (my bad) but the generated .deb file says it was last changed and modified at 20:07. If that's true (which results in ~1 hour of compilation time) I can consider myself very much fortunate :-) Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.25.20.21...@gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On 9/25/2011 11:02 AM, Camaleón wrote: On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 10:18:53 -0500, Stan Hoeppner wrote: On 9/25/2011 9:30 AM, Camaleón wrote: Fair enough, but I wonder what to include in the recipe. If I put too much salt or leave the oven for many hours at the maximun temperature I'll get a pastiche nobody will be able to eat... Have you used make-menuconfig? Nope. I first used the current .config located at /boot, that way I could not fail. Simply go through all the hardware and deselect anything that's not inside that netbook. Of all the network interface cards you'll only need one (or two depending on whether that netbook has an RJ45 port in addition to the wireless NIC). You'll only need one of the dozens of IDE/SATA drivers. You won't need any of the SCSI/RAID or legacy block drivers, though you will need SCSI disk and SCSI CDROM, as libata needs those, as Stephen and I recently discussed. That's easy to say but hard to get and so much for a trial/error test. It's definitely more difficult for non-hardwarefreaks. But honestly, if one isn't a hardwarefreak s/he really has no business rolling his/her own kernel. The entire concept of an operating system kernel is to abstract the hardware from user applications. This concept is over 40 years old. Some 90+% of the Linux kernel code deals with programming and communicating with the hardware. So you really need to know a bit about hardware if you're going to roll your own kernels. Do an lspci and write down all the hardware you have in there. The strip out all the drivers you don't have. If you're unsure, ask. I'm using Sven's advice (in join with Stephen's one), I find it a very good approach. Pick your poison. My point is simply that you need to know what hardware is in the machine so you can include the drivers you need and leave out those you don't. And be patient with yourself. Nearly everyone who embarks on the roll your own journey trips a few times along the way, and has a steep learning curve in the beginning. Over the years, I've never had the need to compile a kernel and this is my 4 kernel compilation in one month... but now I'm making these tests just for fun because all these compilations were aimed to debug the staging wifi drivers but the latest kernel (3.1-rc7, which I tried yesterday) neither worked. One of the biggest problems I see people having with both wired and wireless ethernet controllers is not getting the firmware loaded. Recall the big row on this list about the Realtek 8111/8168 etc? Debian didn't included the firmware in the Debian kernel tree due to Realtek ambiguity on the source license. Thus I recommend to anyone rolling a kernel to use a vanilla/pristine tarball which includes all the firmware blobs, and to build the blobs into your kernel. Also, build fixed hardware drivers into the kernel, not as modules. Fixed meaning non-removable, as in soldered to the system board, such as SATA, wireless ethernet, USB, etc in your netbook. The option to build firmware into the kernel is: CONFIG_FIRMWARE_IN_KERNEL=y Description: http://cateee.net/lkddb/web-lkddb/FIRMWARE_IN_KERNEL.html The only downside is that this adds a few kilobytes to your kernel binary. In my experience this is easier than the recommended way to include firmware, and it's foolproof as long as the firmware is in the source tree. Most are. So I'm afraid I'll wait for your super-customized .config file to use it in my netbook, feel free to send it to my inbox when it's ready:-) Don't hold your breath. :) Ha! I knew it :-) Not all of us are humor impaired. :) -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e7f9996.50...@hardwarefreak.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sun, 25 Sep 2011 10:27:09 -0400 (EDT), Brian a...@cityscape.co.uk wrote: Indeed, but the deck is stacked against kernel-package when it is associated with 'deprecated' in the minds of users. It may not suit the Kernel Team for their use but I've happily and successfully compiled kernels with it for many years without it giving me any problems. Kernel-package was promoted as the Debian way when I first came into contact with it and its creator was active in debian-user with advice. If there is a proper or official Debian position on compiling a kernel it could be inferred from this civilised discussion at: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=599208 I read the above bug report. Did you notice the quote from Manoj Srivastava, the upstream author and Debian package maintainer of kernel-package? (I have taken the liberty of editing it to correct typos.) - Indeed. Since the team of developers in question has never been involved in the development of kernel-package, why do they get a say in deciding that the package is deprecated? I, and a lot of other people, still use kernel-package every day, and the upstream make deb-pkg route does not allow one to make kernel-headers, for instance, nor does it allow one to override or replace parts of the build system or otherwise influence the packages created. The stripped down build in deb package creator is by far not a drop in replacement of kernel package. manoj - Since Manoj wrote this on October 5, 2010, some improvements have been made to make deb-pkg; but make deb-pkg is still not as full-featured or as flexible as make-kpkg. More importantly, Manoj obviously does not consider kernel-package to be deprecated and still uses it himself on a regular basis. As long as Manoj continues to support it, and as long as it offers me the flexibility that I desire and make deb-pkg doesn't, I will continue to use and recommend kernel-package. But I'm not going to argue with those who wish to use make deb-pkg. If it meets their needs, and they want to use it, fine. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/378607842.2110586.1316993197410.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
David Witbrodt dawit...@sbcglobal.net writes: (My goal was to produce a kernel that boots without an initrd; most people will not share that goal.) I would have thought that most people would share that goal, since building an initrd is useful for only two reasons I can think of: 1) You are building a distro kernel that needs to run on many different types of machines, since you don't know what modules would need to be built in to find the root filesystem. 2) You have a complex method of getting the root filesystem mounted - perhaps encrypted LVM on top of a network block device, etc, etc, etc. Since most people who are building their own kernels probably do not have either of these requirements, building without an initrd would make things a lot simpler. I looked into building an initrd with my kernel builds, but it just made things more complicated and I could not see the point. Is there some other reason to use an initrd when building your own customized kernels? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/6334.4e7fd836.76...@getafix.xdna.net
Reducing kernel compilation time
Hello, I had to compile the latest upstream kernel sources to make some debugging with my wifi drivers (from staging) and discovered that compilation took ~5 hours. That's much for testing purposes. Compilation takes place in a netbook governed by Intel's Atom N455 with 2 GiB of RAM and I would like to reduce the compilation time. I'm using the same .config file I have for the current Debian stock kernel (to avoid missing some modules I may need) and just added CONFIG_MATOM=y but it takes almost the same time. I don't need nothing special, just to be able to boot the system, test the staging drivers and then remove/compile a new kernel again so wasting the less time in the process would be great :-) Any trick? Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.24.14.22...@gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
I would build only the relevant kernel *module*, I want to play with (or imported from linux-next): http://wiki.debian.org/HowToRebuildAnOfficialDebianKernelPackage HTH On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Camaleón noela...@gmail.com wrote: Hello, I had to compile the latest upstream kernel sources to make some debugging with my wifi drivers (from staging) and discovered that compilation took ~5 hours. That's much for testing purposes. Compilation takes place in a netbook governed by Intel's Atom N455 with 2 GiB of RAM and I would like to reduce the compilation time. I'm using the same .config file I have for the current Debian stock kernel (to avoid missing some modules I may need) and just added CONFIG_MATOM=y but it takes almost the same time. I don't need nothing special, just to be able to boot the system, test the staging drivers and then remove/compile a new kernel again so wasting the less time in the process would be great :-) Any trick? Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.24.14.22...@gmail.com -- Mathieu -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/ca+7wuswkjzpsajr1jy_czewuz8s9zyyebnkmkkb-a0elyh3...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 16:26:34 +0200, Mathieu Malaterre wrote: On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 4:22 PM, Camaleón noela...@gmail.com wrote: (...) I don't need nothing special, just to be able to boot the system, test the staging drivers and then remove/compile a new kernel again so wasting the less time in the process would be great :-) Any trick? I would build only the relevant kernel *module*, I want to play with (or imported from linux-next): http://wiki.debian.org/HowToRebuildAnOfficialDebianKernelPackage I'll give it a whirl, but reducing kernel compilation time is still something I would like to have. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.24.14.43...@gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On 2011-09-24 16:22 +0200, Camaleón wrote: I had to compile the latest upstream kernel sources to make some debugging with my wifi drivers (from staging) and discovered that compilation took ~5 hours. That's much for testing purposes. Compilation takes place in a netbook governed by Intel's Atom N455 with 2 GiB of RAM and I would like to reduce the compilation time. I'm using the same .config file I have for the current Debian stock kernel (to avoid missing some modules I may need) and just added CONFIG_MATOM=y but it takes almost the same time. I don't need nothing special, just to be able to boot the system, test the staging drivers and then remove/compile a new kernel again so wasting the less time in the process would be great :-) Any trick? Plug in any hardware that you intend to use with your netbook and then run make localmodconfig. This works from Linux 2.6.32 onwards¹. Sven ¹ http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_32#head-11f54cdac41ad6150ef817fd68597554d9d05a5f -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/874o02hsun@turtle.gmx.de
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 10:22:33 -0400 (EDT), Camaleón wrote: I had to compile the latest upstream kernel sources to make some debugging with my wifi drivers (from staging) and discovered that compilation took ~5 hours. That's much for testing purposes. Compilation takes place in a netbook governed by Intel's Atom N455 with 2 GiB of RAM and I would like to reduce the compilation time. I'm using the same .config file I have for the current Debian stock kernel (to avoid missing some modules I may need) and just added CONFIG_MATOM=y but it takes almost the same time. I don't need nothing special, just to be able to boot the system, test the staging drivers and then remove/compile a new kernel again so wasting the less time in the process would be great :-) Any trick? Hello, Camaleón. I'm not familiar with the capabilities of your hardware, but if you have multiple CPUs (cores) available, and you're using kernel-package, you can make use of the environment variable CONCURRENCY_LEVEL to set the number of simultaneous compile tasks. For example, CONCURRENCY_LEVEL=2 make-kpkg ... if you have a dual-core processor. You seem to have enough RAM to support that. Note that there is a patch you will need for kernel-package if you're using a version 3 kernel. See my kernel-building web page for details. http://users.wowway.com/~zlinuxman/Kernel.htm If you have a quad-core machine, you can set CONCURRENCY_LEVEL to 4. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/109735586.2090397.1316880067341.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 17:18:08 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote: On 2011-09-24 16:22 +0200, Camaleón wrote: (...) I don't need nothing special, just to be able to boot the system, test the staging drivers and then remove/compile a new kernel again so wasting the less time in the process would be great :-) Any trick? Plug in any hardware that you intend to use with your netbook and then run make localmodconfig. This works from Linux 2.6.32 onwards¹. ¹ http://kernelnewbies.org/Linux_2_6_32#head-11f54cdac41ad6150ef817fd68597554d9d05a5f I'll test that, it sounds very good :-) (I guess that CONFIG_MATOM=y still needs to be manually added, right?) I hope that by cherry picking kernel modules compilation time is reduced significantly. I'll report back how it went, thanks. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.24.16.04...@gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 12:01:07 -0400, Stephen Powell wrote: On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 10:22:33 -0400 (EDT), Camaleón wrote: (...) I don't need nothing special, just to be able to boot the system, test the staging drivers and then remove/compile a new kernel again so wasting the less time in the process would be great :-) Any trick? Hello, Camaleón. I'm not familiar with the capabilities of your hardware, but if you have multiple CPUs (cores) available, and you're using kernel-package, you can make use of the environment variable CONCURRENCY_LEVEL to set the number of simultaneous compile tasks. What do you mean by kernel-package? Debian's vanilla kernel? No, sources have to be from upstream. I already have compiled and installed a vanilla kernel from Debian sources but wifi driver fails at the same point than Debian's stock kernel. I need to try the greatest and latest kernel source (3.1-rc7). For example, CONCURRENCY_LEVEL=2 make-kpkg ... if you have a dual-core processor. You seem to have enough RAM to support that. Note that there is a patch you will need for kernel-package if you're using a version 3 kernel. See my kernel-building web page for details. http://users.wowway.com/~zlinuxman/Kernel.htm If you have a quad-core machine, you can set CONCURRENCY_LEVEL to 4. Yes... I've already¹ walked through that link, and it's fantastic for Debian starters, very well explained with detailed steps (have you considered adding it into Debian's wiki, or at least -if not the full article- a link to it?) ¹I noticed you pointed to it in another thread where someone asked for something similar ;-) Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.09.24.16.18...@gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On 2011-09-24 18:04 +0200, Camaleón wrote: On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 17:18:08 +0200, Sven Joachim wrote: Plug in any hardware that you intend to use with your netbook and then run make localmodconfig. This works from Linux 2.6.32 onwards¹. I'll test that, it sounds very good :-) (I guess that CONFIG_MATOM=y still needs to be manually added, right?) If the currently running kernel does not have it (i.e. you still run a Debian kernel), then yes. Sven -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/87ty81hq09@turtle.gmx.de
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 12:01 PM, Stephen Powell zlinux...@wowway.com wrote: On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 10:22:33 -0400 (EDT), Camaleón wrote: I had to compile the latest upstream kernel sources to make some debugging with my wifi drivers (from staging) and discovered that compilation took ~5 hours. That's much for testing purposes. Compilation takes place in a netbook governed by Intel's Atom N455 with 2 GiB of RAM and I would like to reduce the compilation time. I'm using the same .config file I have for the current Debian stock kernel (to avoid missing some modules I may need) and just added CONFIG_MATOM=y but it takes almost the same time. I don't need nothing special, just to be able to boot the system, test the staging drivers and then remove/compile a new kernel again so wasting the less time in the process would be great :-) I'm not familiar with the capabilities of your hardware, but if you have multiple CPUs (cores) available, and you're using kernel-package, you can make use of the environment variable CONCURRENCY_LEVEL to set the number of simultaneous compile tasks. For example, CONCURRENCY_LEVEL=2 make-kpkg ... CONCURRENCY_LEVEL=$(getconf _NPROCESSORS_ONLN) although getconf _NPROCESSORS_ONLN on an atom's probably 1; but you never know... You can also pass INSTALL_MOD_STRIP=1 to make-kpkg so that the make modules_install step strips out debugging information (if this isn't done by default). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/CAOdo=Szv0Ff9N=fsyfciy+-ervy5pplf_irmftg4poswplc...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 12:18:47 -0400 (EDT), Camaleón wrote: What do you mean by kernel-package? Debian's vanilla kernel? kernel-package is the name of a Debian package, as in aptitude install kernel-package It is not a kernel. It is a collection of scripts, configuration files, etc. that are intended to aid in the process of compiling a kernel and building a Debian binary kernel package. The make-kpkg command is one of the scripts in the kernel-package package. No, sources have to be from upstream. kernel-package can be used with official Debian kernel source packages or with pristine kernel sources acquired directly from upstream. When using upstream kernel sources directly, one cannot use the Debian package version in the --revision option, since there is no Debian package version. You have to make one up. Other than that, it works just fine for upstream kernel sources. I've done it before, and for similar reasons as you. Yes... I've already¹ walked through that link, and it's fantastic for Debian starters, very well explained with detailed steps (have you considered adding it into Debian's wiki, or at least -if not the full article- a link to it?) ¹I noticed you pointed to it in another thread where someone asked for something similar ;-) The Debian kernel team seems to think that kernel-package should be considered deprecated. (Although, as far as I know, the author of kernel-package does not share that opinion.) Therefore, I'm not sure that my kernel-building stuff would be welcome in the official wiki. The kernel team encourages the use of make deb-pkg. But I personally don't like make deb-pkg because of its one size fits all build philosophy. For example, it always produces a headers package, and I often don't need a headers package. With kernel-package, I only get the packages that I ask for. And since your goal is to reduce kernel compilation time, I would think that you would not want extra packages produced that you don't need. That takes additional time. If you decide to try kernel-package, make sure that you apply the patch file listed in the web page. It won't work properly with a version 3 kernel unless you do. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1610419885.2091849.1316888037313.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 13:56:35 -0400 (EDT), Tom H wrote: CONCURRENCY_LEVEL=$(getconf _NPROCESSORS_ONLN) although getconf _NPROCESSORS_ONLN on an atom's probably 1; but you never know... You can also pass INSTALL_MOD_STRIP=1 to make-kpkg so that the make modules_install step strips out debugging information (if this isn't done by default). Thanks for the tips, Tom! I believe I'll incorporate one or both of those tips during the next revision of my kernel-building web page. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1203183261.2091906.1316888418264.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sat, 2011-09-24 at 20:20 +, debian-user-digest-requ...@lists.debian.org wrote: CONCURRENCY_LEVEL=2 I didn't read the thread, just one mail. For my 2.1 GHz dual-core Athlon CONCURRENCY_LEVEL does minimal reduce compiling time. I suspect that consequently reducing unneeded stuff would be much more time reducing, unfortunately it takes a lot of time to edit such a basic config. I never did and still suffer when compiling a kernel and regarding to my audio needs I need to build kernels very often. Fortunately I'm able to use my computer, while building a kernel, unfortunately it might take an hour, before I know, that something fishy does stop building the kernel and this could happen 3 or 4 times again, before a kernel will be build. Yep, it's a PITA, OTOH, for other OSs there's no possibility to build a kernel that fits to personal needs. Live is a PITA ;) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1316897087.4933.65.camel@debian
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On 9/24/2011 9:22 AM, Camaleón wrote: Hello, I had to compile the latest upstream kernel sources to make some debugging with my wifi drivers (from staging) and discovered that compilation took ~5 hours. That's much for testing purposes. Compilation takes place in a netbook governed by Intel's Atom N455 with 2 GiB of RAM and I would like to reduce the compilation time. I'm using the same .config file I have for the current Debian stock kernel (to avoid missing some modules I may need) and just added CONFIG_MATOM=y but it takes almost the same time. I don't need nothing special, just to be able to boot the system, test the staging drivers and then remove/compile a new kernel again so wasting the less time in the process would be great :-) Any trick? 5 hours? Did you say 5 hours? I have a 10 year old dual Mendocino 550 machine with only 384MB of PC100 that takes about 30 minutes to compile my custom kernels using make -j2. I'd guess you're including the kitchen sink. Don't build the hundreds of driver modules your machines won't ever use. That is the key to reducing build time. -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e7e4887.3090...@hardwarefreak.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sat, 2011-09-24 at 22:44 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Sat, 2011-09-24 at 20:20 +, debian-user-digest-requ...@lists.debian.org wrote: CONCURRENCY_LEVEL=2 I didn't read the thread, just one mail. For my 2.1 GHz dual-core Athlon CONCURRENCY_LEVEL does minimal reduce compiling time. I suspect that consequently reducing unneeded stuff would be much more time reducing, unfortunately it takes a lot of time to edit such a basic config. I never did and still suffer when compiling a kernel and regarding to my audio needs I need to build kernels very often. Fortunately I'm able to use my computer, while building a kernel, unfortunately it might take an hour, before I know, that something fishy does stop building the kernel and this could happen 3 or 4 times again, before a kernel will be build. Yep, it's a PITA, OTOH, for other OSs there's no possibility to build a kernel that fits to personal needs. Live is a PITA ;) An example spinymouse@debian:/boot$ cat config-2.6.39.1 | grep TABLET CONFIG_INPUT_TABLET=y CONFIG_TABLET_USB_ACECAD=m CONFIG_TABLET_USB_AIPTEK=m CONFIG_TABLET_USB_GTCO=m # CONFIG_TABLET_USB_HANWANG is not set CONFIG_TABLET_USB_KBTAB=m CONFIG_TABLET_USB_WACOM=m I would like to have a tablet, but I don't have got a tablet. When building this kernel, one time something unneeded was build as part of the kernel and 5 times an unneeded module was build. Just one unneded thingy wasn't build. You can grep anything else and you will see, that you build tons of unneeded stuff. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1316898460.5414.2.camel@debian
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On 9/24/2011 11:01 AM, Stephen Powell wrote: On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 10:22:33 -0400 (EDT), Camaleón wrote: Intel's Atom N455 I'm not familiar with the capabilities of your hardware, but if you have multiple CPUs (cores) The Atom 455 is a single core 64/32 bit CPU with HyperThreading, 1.66GHz, 512KB L2 cache, single channel DDR2/3 interface. http://ark.intel.com/products/49491 I would guess that 64 bit gcc would probably run a bit faster than 32 bit gcc on this chip, with twice as many GPRs available. Give that a shot if you're not doing so already. -- Stan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4e7e4bfd.6020...@hardwarefreak.com
Re: Reducing kernel compilation time
On Sat, 24 Sep 2011 17:15:51 -0400 (EDT), Stan Hoeppner wrote: 5 hours? Did you say 5 hours? I have a 10 year old dual Mendocino 550 machine with only 384MB of PC100 that takes about 30 minutes to compile my custom kernels using make -j2. I'd guess you're including the kitchen sink. Don't build the hundreds of driver modules your machines won't ever use. That is the key to reducing build time. +1 Absolutely, Stan. Building a lean and mean kernel, one which only contains what the machine needs, is where the big savings are. But configuring the kernel to do that takes time. And it is easy to make a mistake. For example, I've learned from experience that I need SCSI support in my kernel, even though I have no SCSI adapter in my machine. So much stuff emulates SCSI now, or uses SCSI protocols in communication. -- .''`. Stephen Powell : :' : `. `'` `- -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/868903406.2094701.1316908513981.javamail.r...@md01.wow.synacor.com
Question about kernel compilation
Hi... I am testing self made kernels on my desktop, using the debian way found in http://www.howtoforge.com... My question is about the name given to the deb package generated... How can I change the string -10.00.Custom_i386 in the package name? I am running debian testing/lenny. Thanks a lot. -- .---. | Miguel J. Jiménez | | Programador Senior| | Área de Internet | | [EMAIL PROTECTED]| :---: | ISOTROL, S.A. | | Edificio BLUENET, Avda. Isaac Newton nº3, 4ª planta. | | Parque Tecnológico Cartuja '93, 41092 Sevilla (ESP). | | Teléfono: +34 955 036 800 (ext.1805) - Fax: +34 955 036 849 | | http://www.isotrol.com| :---: | Una bandera une a los habitantes de un pais bajo unos ideales| | comunes y es por eso por lo que todos ellos deben aceptarlos de | | buena gana y no ser forzados a ello pues entonces dicha bandera | | no serviría de nada. - Emperador Ming, Flash Gordon (1x07)(2007) | '---' begin:vcard fn;quoted-printable:Miguel J. Jim=C3=A9nez Jim=C3=A9nez n;quoted-printable:Jim=C3=A9nez Jim=C3=A9nez;Miguel J. org;quoted-printable:ISOTROL, S.A.;Sector P=C3=BAblico / Gestores de Contenidos adr;quoted-printable;quoted-printable;quoted-printable:Parque Tecnol=C3=B3gico Cartuja 93;;C/ Isaac Newton 3, 4=C2=AA;Sevilla;Sevilla;41092;Espa=C3=B1a email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Programador Senior tel;work:+34 955 036 800 (ext. 1805) tel;fax:+34 955 036 849 tel;cell:+34 607 44 87 64 x-mozilla-html:TRUE url:http://www.isotrol.com version:2.1 end:vcard
Re: Question about kernel compilation
Hello Miguel, if you are using make-kpkg , you may try the option `--revision' hth, Jerome Miguel J. Jiménez wrote: Hi... I am testing self made kernels on my desktop, using the debian way found in http://www.howtoforge.com... My question is about the name given to the deb package generated... How can I change the string -10.00.Custom_i386 in the package name? I am running debian testing/lenny. Thanks a lot. -- Jerome BENOIT jgmbenoit_at_mailsnare_dot_net
Re: Question about kernel compilation
Hi, You can use the option --revision in make-kpkg (make-kpkg --initrd --revision 1.0 kernel_image) or you can change the default in file /etc/kernel-pkg.conf to 1.0 so everytime you give make-kpkg the revision is always want you want. Bye -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: automatique des headers du kernel / compilation driver rt2500
Monsieur Bidon, mercredi 1 août 2007, 11:36:24 CEST Salut tout le monde, ’lut, J'adore trop la distrib Debian pour son système de paquet. Et j'essaye d'optimiser pour que les mise à jours se résume à un comb o apt-get update / apt-get dist-upgrade. Mon soucis, vient du driver de ma carte wifi elle est basé sur le chip rt2500, cette carte est très bien géré par notre OS favori et je la conseille à tous (pas chère tout ça...). Quand je fais les mises à jours de mon PC (je suis en SID donc ça arrive très souvent) et le kernel évolue, je suis coincé ! Car je ne sais pas pourquoi, mais, à priori il n'y a pas de driver compilé de fournis dans les dépots Debian. Je suis donc obligé de compiler moi même ce driver. Ce n'est pas très grave, le problème c'est qu'apt ne me télécharge pas automatiquement les nouveaux headers du kernel. module-assistant a dû t’installer linux-headers-2.6.x-a (qui correspond au linux-image-...). Quand une mise à jour installe automatiquement un autre linux-image, c’est que tu as le paquet linux-image-2.6-a qui vient d’être modifié pour ne plus dépendre de linux-image-2.6.x-a mais de linux-image-2.6.y-a. Apt n’a aucune raison de mettre à jour linux-headers-2.6.x-a. Pour que Apt ait une telle raison, il faut que tu installes le paquet linux-headers-2.6-a, lequel dépend du lx-hdrs-2.6.x-a, et lequel dépendra du lx-hdr-2.6.z-a quand il apparaîtra. Je ne suis pas sûr d’être bien clair. Peut-être avec un petit schéma : avant : l-i-2.6-a, dépend de l-i-2.6.x-a l-i-2.6.x-a, installé par dépendance l-h-2.6.x-a, installé par m-a mise à jour : l-i-2.6-a, dépend de l-i-2.6.y-a l-i-2.6.x-a, peut être supprimé l-i-2.6.y-a, installé par dépendance l-h-2.6.x-a, reste l-h-2.6.y-a, reste Il faut donc : l-i-2.6-a, dépend de l-i-2.6.x-a l-i-2.6.x-a, installé par dépendance l-h-2.6-a, dépend de l-h-2.6.x-a l-h-2.6.x-a, installé par m-a^W dépendance pour que l-h-2.6.x-a suive la version courante du noyau. De plus j'aimerais bien que la compil soit directement faite à l'update car il s'agit d'une simple ligne de commande : module-assistant auto-install rt2500-source. Le mieux est que cette commande soit effectuée une fois que l’on a démarré avec le noyau nouvellement installé. Ce n’est pas très facile à automatiser (est-on sûr que c’est le bon noyau qui est lancé...). Alors avez vous des idées pour que les headers soient directement téléchargés et que ma compil se fasse automatiquement ? Mr Bidon -- Sylvain Sauvage
automatique des headers du kernel / compilation driver rt2500
Salut tout le monde, J'adore trop la distrib Debian pour son système de paquet. Et j'essaye d'optimiser pour que les mise à jours se résume à un comb o apt-get update / apt-get dist-upgrade. Mon soucis, vient du driver de ma carte wifi elle est basé sur le chip rt2500, cette carte est très bien géré par notre OS favori et je la conseille à tous (pas chère tout ça...). Quand je fais les mises à jours de mon PC (je suis en SID donc ça arrive très souvent) et le kernel évolue, je suis coincé ! Car je ne sais pas pourquoi, mais, à priori il n'y a pas de driver compilé de fournis dans les dépots Debian. Je suis donc obligé de compiler moi même ce driver. Ce n'est pas très grave, le problème c'est qu'apt ne me télécharge pas automatiquement les nouveaux headers du kernel. De plus j'aimerais bien que la compil soit directement faite à l'update car il s'agit d'une simple ligne de commande : module-assistant auto-install rt2500-source. Alors avez vous des idées pour que les headers soient directement téléchargés et que ma compil se fasse automatiquement ? Mr Bidon
kernel compilation
Hi all, I was always downloading from www.kernel.org, using always the same .config file, and everything was fine. Up to the point I found out that the newer kernels which were supposed to have new options (CONFIG_ACPI_SLEEP) are not having them. I tried to compile the configure the kernel without any .config file, and any /boot/config.* files, but still, the newer options were not there. My question is how to get all available configuration options when I type make menuconfig. Cheers, Ivan -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kernel Compilation
Hello, After being stuck for 3 days trying to recompile my kernel, I'm seeking help. Guess the answer should be quite simple. I've managed after some work to install debian on my new Dell machine (ICH7 controller + SATA): I debootstrapped the system from Knoppix and then installed the latest kernel 2.6.15-1-686-smp from the backports with initramfs-tools. I need to recompile it to add support for some hardware (not relevant here). Unfortunately, it seems that I can't even recompile the 2.6.15-1-686 kernel with the same configuration my machine uses. The step I'm making: apt-get install linux-source-2.6.15 unpack the sources, go to kernel sources directory copy /boot/config-2.6.15-1-686 to .config make bzImage make modules make modules_install I copy the bzImage and System.map to boot, generate an initrd.img file using initramfs -o /boot/initrd.img and then reboot the machine with the new initrd image and bzImage. The system reports it can't find my root device /dev/sda1 (which is SATA on ICH7) But it works with the debian kernel presumably built with the same config file!!! I've tried many things including compiling SATA support directly into the kernel, using the latest build from kernel.org, but the problem remains the same Sad( Can someone tell me what I am doing wrong? I haven't compiled a kernel in a couple of years, maybe that's the reason... Thanks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel Compilation
Hello Roman, Just been through the exercise of building my first Debian kernel myself. If you have never built a Debian kernel before, the 'Debian way' of doing it seems quite different to that on most other Linux's. The method I used to reproduce my stock stable kernel-source-2.6.8 after a new install was as follows: apt-get install kernel-tree-2.6.8 cd /usr/src tar jxf kernel-source-2.6.8.tar.bz2 cd kernel-source-2.6.8 cp /boot/config-2.6.8-2-386 .config make-kpkg clean make-kpkg --revision=libretto.1.0 --initrd kernel_image dpkg -i ../kernel-image-2.6.8_libretto.1.0_i386.deb It is presumably possible to do build a kernel the 'traditional' way, but you may want to try doing it the 'Debian way' first before trying anything more maverick. Your error message suggests to me that your initrd is not loading the correct driver modules. On Sun, Feb 05, 2006 at 11:49:54AM +, Roman Kouzmenko wrote: Hello, After being stuck for 3 days trying to recompile my kernel, I'm seeking help. Guess the answer should be quite simple. I've managed after some work to install debian on my new Dell machine (ICH7 controller + SATA): I debootstrapped the system from Knoppix and then installed the latest kernel 2.6.15-1-686-smp from the backports with initramfs-tools. I need to recompile it to add support for some hardware (not relevant here). Unfortunately, it seems that I can't even recompile the 2.6.15-1-686 kernel with the same configuration my machine uses. The step I'm making: apt-get install linux-source-2.6.15 unpack the sources, go to kernel sources directory copy /boot/config-2.6.15-1-686 to .config make bzImage make modules make modules_install I copy the bzImage and System.map to boot, generate an initrd.img file using initramfs -o /boot/initrd.img and then reboot the machine with the new initrd image and bzImage. The system reports it can't find my root device /dev/sda1 (which is SATA on ICH7) But it works with the debian kernel presumably built with the same config file!!! I've tried many things including compiling SATA support directly into the kernel, using the latest build from kernel.org, but the problem remains the same Sad( Can someone tell me what I am doing wrong? I haven't compiled a kernel in a couple of years, maybe that's the reason... Thanks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Digby R. S. Tarvin digbyt(at)digbyt.com http://www.digbyt.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel Compilation
Hello Roman Kouzmenko ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: I've managed after some work to install debian on my new Dell machine (ICH7 controller + SATA): I debootstrapped the system from Knoppix and then installed the latest kernel 2.6.15-1-686-smp from the backports with initramfs-tools. I need to recompile it to add support for some hardware (not relevant here). Unfortunately, it seems that I can't even recompile the 2.6.15-1-686 kernel with the same configuration my machine uses. The step I'm making: apt-get install linux-source-2.6.15 unpack the sources, go to kernel sources directory copy /boot/config-2.6.15-1-686 to .config = This is when you should have run make oldconfig to apply the new configuration from your Debian Kernel. make bzImage = And this is where I suggest you use kernel-package/make-kpkg instead, e.g. `fakeroot make-kpkg --revision 1.0 kernel_image`. This will create a Debian package with the kernel and modules in /usr/src. Use dpkg -i to install it. make modules make modules_install I copy the bzImage and System.map to boot, generate an initrd.img file using initramfs -o /boot/initrd.img and then reboot the machine with the new initrd image and bzImage. The system reports it can't find my root device /dev/sda1 (which is SATA on ICH7) Did you reconfigure your bootloader accordingly? Did you tell it where the initrd is? Btw, if you use kernel-package, this will be done automatically. best regards Andreas Janssen -- Andreas Janssen [EMAIL PROTECTED] PGP-Key-ID: 0xDC801674 ICQ #17079270 Registered Linux User #267976 http://www.andreas-janssen.de/debian-tipps-sarge.html -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kernel compilation
Hi all For some reason I seem to be getting the following message when type make menuconfig scripts/kconfig/mconf.c:91: error: static declaration of 'current_menu' follows non-static declaration scripts/kconfig/lkc.h:63: error: previous declaration of 'current_menu' was here make[1]: *** [scripts/kconfig/mconf.o] Error 1 make: *** [menuconfig] Error 2 ukgate:/usr/src/linux# I have ncurses installed etc abc:/usr/src/linux# dpkg -l | grep -i ncur* ii libncurses5 5.5-1 Shared libraries for terminal handling ii libncurses5-dev 5.5-1 Developer's libraries and docs for ncurses ii libncursesw5 5.5-1 Shared libraries for terminal handling (wide ii mtr-tiny 0.69-2 Full screen ncurses traceroute tool ii ncurses-base 5.5-1 Descriptions of common terminal types ii ncurses-bin 5.5-1 Terminal-related programs and man pages ii ncurses-term 5.5-1 Additional terminal type definitions abc:/usr/src/linux# The only thing that I dont have installed is libqt3-mt-dev. What I require is a very minimalisc installation. If anyone could assist, I would be most grateful. Kind Regards Brent Clark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel compilation
Hi! For some reason I seem to be getting the following message when type make menuconfig scripts/kconfig/mconf.c:91: error: static declaration of 'current_menu' follows non-static declaration scripts/kconfig/lkc.h:63: error: previous declaration of 'current_menu' was here make[1]: *** [scripts/kconfig/mconf.o] Error 1 make: *** [menuconfig] Error 2 ukgate:/usr/src/linux# Which Kernel-Version do you want to compile? Is it a kernel that you've directly downloaded from kernel.org? Which version of gcc do you use? Regards, Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel compilation
Andi Drebes wrote: Hi! For some reason I seem to be getting the following message when type make menuconfig scripts/kconfig/mconf.c:91: error: static declaration of 'current_menu' follows non-static declaration scripts/kconfig/lkc.h:63: error: previous declaration of 'current_menu' was here make[1]: *** [scripts/kconfig/mconf.o] Error 1 make: *** [menuconfig] Error 2 ukgate:/usr/src/linux# Which Kernel-Version do you want to compile? Is it a kernel that you've directly downloaded from kernel.org? Which version of gcc do you use? Regards, Andi Hi Andi Thanks for replying, no its from the debian repositry. ukgate:/usr/src/linux# dpkg -l | grep -i gcc ii gcc 4.0.2-2The GNU C compiler ii gcc-2.95 2.95.4-22 The GNU C compiler ii gcc-3.3 3.3.6-10 The GNU C compiler ii gcc-3.3-base 3.3.6-10 The GNU Compiler Collection (base package) ii gcc-4.0 4.0.2-5The GNU C compiler ii gcc-4.0-base 4.0.2-5The GNU Compiler Collection (base package) ii lib64gcc14.0.2-5GCC support library (64bit) ii libgcc1 4.0.2-5GCC support library ukgate:/usr/src/linux# TIA Brent Clark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel compilation
Hi Brent! Thanks for replying, no its from the debian repositry. ok. But which version did you obtain? ukgate:/usr/src/linux# dpkg -l | grep -i gcc ii gcc 4.0.2-2The GNU C compiler ii gcc-2.95 2.95.4-22 The GNU C compiler ii gcc-3.3 3.3.6-10 The GNU C compiler ii gcc-3.3-base 3.3.6-10 The GNU Compiler Collection (base package) ii gcc-4.0 4.0.2-5The GNU C compiler ii gcc-4.0-base 4.0.2-5The GNU Compiler Collection (base package) ii lib64gcc14.0.2-5GCC support library (64bit) ii libgcc1 4.0.2-5GCC support library ukgate:/usr/src/linux# Nice list. but which version are you actually using? just type: gcc --version to find out which version of gcc is actually used. Andi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel compilation
If its from debian repository try to compile it with make-kpkg first say # apt-get install kernel-package fakeroot libncurses5-dev may be this will solve your dependacy problem get into kernel source directory # make-kpkg clean # fakeroot make-kpkg --config menuconfig --revision=custom.1.0 kernel_image for more details google with debian kernel compilation Regards, Abhisawa -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: a kernel compilation question
Elimar Riesebieter wrote: On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 the mental interface of Doofus told: tar -xjf kernel-version.tar.bz cd linux-version make-kpkg debian dch -i Type your changes to the changelog like: New vanilla upstream cp /boot/config-whatever .config make menuconfig to custom your kernel make-kpkg build fakeroot make-kpkg kernel-image This failed because debian/control is missing. Why? Moreover I had to copy Debian.src.changelog in debian/changelog before dch -i; I think I'm missing something, but what? Regards. Radel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: a kernel compilation question
On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 the mental interface of Raffaele D'Elia told: Elimar Riesebieter wrote: On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 the mental interface of Doofus told: tar -xjf kernel-version.tar.bz cd linux-version make-kpkg debian dch -i Type your changes to the changelog like: New vanilla upstream cp /boot/config-whatever .config make menuconfig to custom your kernel make-kpkg build fakeroot make-kpkg kernel-image This failed because debian/control is missing. Why? $ make-kpkg debian within the kernel source tree will provide all you need. Please notice that kernel-package and devscripts must be installed ;-) Elimar -- .~. /V\ L I N U X /( )\ Phear the Penguin ^^-^^ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: a kernel compilation question
Elimar Riesebieter wrote: On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 the mental interface of Raffaele D'Elia told: Elimar Riesebieter wrote: On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 the mental interface of Doofus told: tar -xjf kernel-version.tar.bz cd linux-version make-kpkg debian dch -i Type your changes to the changelog like: New vanilla upstream cp /boot/config-whatever .config make menuconfig to custom your kernel make-kpkg build fakeroot make-kpkg kernel-image This failed because debian/control is missing. Why? $ make-kpkg debian within the kernel source tree will provide all you need. Please notice that kernel-package and devscripts must be installed ;-) Something more is missing; make-kpkg debian creates only debian/rules, but neither debian/changelog nor debian/control. I've kernel-package and devscripts installed too. Radel -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
a kernel compilation question
The debian reference manual says there are two ways, the debian standard method: http://www.uk.debian.org/doc/manuals/reference/ch-kernel.en.html#s-kernel-debian and the classic method: http://www.uk.debian.org/doc/manuals/reference/ch-kernel.en.html#s-kernel-classic where the first uses a kernel deb package and lots of nice debian-make-it-simple utilities, while the second uses the method outlined in the documentation distributed with the kernels source. Is there any reason not to combine the two methods, ie download the latest 2.4 from kernel.org (which I want), but use make-kpkg clean and make-kpkg kernel_image (which I like)? Thanks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: a kernel compilation question
On Tue, 19 Jul 2005 the mental interface of Doofus told: [...] Is there any reason not to combine the two methods, ie download the latest 2.4 from kernel.org (which I want), but use make-kpkg clean and make-kpkg kernel_image (which I like)? The way I do it: As root: $EDITOR /etc/kernel-pkg.conf maintainer := Your Name email := [EMAIL PROTECTED] priority := Low debian := 1yourfantasy0 /your/kernel/archiv must be rw by your user cd /your/kernel/archiv download the wanted kernel from www.kernel.org tar -xjf kernel-version.tar.bz cd linux-version make-kpkg debian dch -i Type your changes to the changelog like: New vanilla upstream cp /boot/config-whatever .config make menuconfig to custom your kernel make-kpkg build fakeroot make-kpkg kernel-image If you you want to compile some modules in extra (mol, nvidia, ...) fakeroot make-kpkg kernel-image modules_image The special terms for the package name will be taken from /etc/kernel-pkg.conf. Thats it. Elimar -- Excellent day for drinking heavily. Spike the office water cooler;-) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: a kernel compilation question
Doofus wrote: Is there any reason not to combine the two methods, ie download the latest 2.4 from kernel.org (which I want), but use make-kpkg clean and make-kpkg kernel_image (which I like)? I do not have an answer to your question. But may I ask why you are trying to compile 1) latest 2.4 kernel instead of the 2.6 series? IMHO, if you do not have a valid reason, you should compile the 2.6 kernel. 2) Why get the source from kernel.org? Instead you can use the debian kernel (apt-cache search kernel-source) which is more trusted by the Debian community? The Debian's kernel will have debian specific patches patched into it. That is good enough reason to avoid compiling kernels from kernel.org . raju -- Kamaraju S Kusumanchi Graduate Student, MAE Cornell University http://www.people.cornell.edu/pages/kk288/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: a kernel compilation question
Doofus writes: Is there any reason not to combine the two methods, ie download the latest 2.4 from kernel.org (which I want), but use make-kpkg clean and make-kpkg kernel_image (which I like)? No. Kernel-package works fine with kernel.org kernels. -- John Hasler -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: a kernel compilation question
Doofus wrote: Is there any reason not to combine the two methods, ie download the latest 2.4 from kernel.org (which I want), but use make-kpkg clean and make-kpkg kernel_image (which I like)? Combine the methods? That's how the maintainers make the deb packages more or less. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: a kernel compilation question
On Monday 18 July 2005 07:43 pm, Doofus wrote: The debian reference manual says there are two ways, the debian standard method: http://www.uk.debian.org/doc/manuals/reference/ch-kernel.en.html#s-kernel-d ebian and the classic method: http://www.uk.debian.org/doc/manuals/reference/ch-kernel.en.html#s-kernel-c lassic where the first uses a kernel deb package and lots of nice debian-make-it-simple utilities, while the second uses the method outlined in the documentation distributed with the kernels source. Is there any reason not to combine the two methods, ie download the latest 2.4 from kernel.org (which I want), but use make-kpkg clean and make-kpkg kernel_image (which I like)? Thanks Nope, just get the latest source, extract and configure it, then run 'fakeroot make-kpkg kernel_image' and you'll get a kernel-image...deb file -- you don't even need to do 'make-kpkg clean' first if you don't want to. I'm happily doing this for various patchsets against 2.6 and 2.6 mainline on a number of computers with no problems. -- Ryan Schultz - floating point exception: divide by cucumber -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
NVidia drivers kernel compilation: version magic?
Hey ho, From my very first steps with Debian, I was taught to compile kernel sources myself, rather than the proverbial Debian way, so that's what I've been doing ever since. After compilation, an sh ./NVIDIA_binary_driver_package.run has never failed on me, until recently. For some reason, when it's done building the kernel module, it fails to load it. Its error log (/var/log/nvidia-installer.log) then states this: nvidia: version magic '2.6.11.11-zukunft preempt PENTIUM4 4KSTACKS gcc-3.2' should be '2.6.11.11-zukunft preempt PENTIUM4 4KSTACKS gcc-3.3 I try my very best, but I just can't see the problem... /proc/version definitely shows the kernel was compiled with gcc version 3.3.6, so why is my kernel showing version magic including gcc-3.2? Googling the error message merely points to faulty symlinks or sources that don't match the running kernel, but those can't be the problem. Since I've never done this any other way, I can't imagine I'm doing something wrong, but of course, there are lots of things I never had to wonder about anyway... Could someone perhaps enlighten me on what the problem could be? Cheers, Tom -- keys: http://tmp.verbreyt.be/files/ (abwaerts.asc verbreyt.asc) - np: Les Joyaux de la Princesse - Tiefe Sehnsucht pgpwZavPmG7r3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: kernel compilation buggy?
On May 23, 2005 at 10:03:13PM -0700, Marc Wilson wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 07:06:31PM +0200, Alberto Bert wrote: I just tryed to compile the 2.6.22 kernel with make-kpkg and the default config file. Is there any indication whatsoever that the default configuration file is appropriate for your hardware? The debian kernel 2.6.11-686 works, so I supposed the .config file should be ok... Am I wrong? It's not the first time I compile the kernel in the debian way. I always used a custom kernel... Alberto -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: kernel compilation buggy?
On 23 May 2005, Ionut Georgescu wrote: Hello Alberto, I run 2.6.11-ck8 and 2.6.11.2 with no issues. Both compiled with make-kpkg. Could it be a wrong .config file ? Regards, Ionut Is this the vanilla kernel source or the Debian kernel-source package? Anthony -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]|| http://www.acampbell.org.uk for using Linux GNU/Debian || blog, book reviews, electronic Windows-free zone || books and skeptical articles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: kernel compilation buggy?
On May 24, 2005 at 09:02:59AM +0100, Anthony Campbell wrote: On 23 May 2005, Ionut Georgescu wrote: Hello Alberto, I run 2.6.11-ck8 and 2.6.11.2 with no issues. Both compiled with make-kpkg. Could it be a wrong .config file ? Regards, Ionut Is this the vanilla kernel source or the Debian kernel-source package? It's the kernel-source. Today I see there's an update to the initrd-tools, I'm now recompiling after the installation. I'll let you know. Alb -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: kernel compilation buggy?
I usually run vanilla sources. For the 2.6.11.-ck8 I wanted to give the much praised -ck patch a try, but for now I haven't seen any difference yet :-) Ionut On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 09:02:59AM +0100, Anthony Campbell wrote: On 23 May 2005, Ionut Georgescu wrote: Hello Alberto, I run 2.6.11-ck8 and 2.6.11.2 with no issues. Both compiled with make-kpkg. Could it be a wrong .config file ? Regards, Ionut Is this the vanilla kernel source or the Debian kernel-source package? Anthony -- [EMAIL PROTECTED]|| http://www.acampbell.org.uk for using Linux GNU/Debian || blog, book reviews, electronic Windows-free zone || books and skeptical articles -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- *** * Ionu Georgescu * Max-Planck-Institut fr Physik komplexer Systeme * Noethnitzer Str. 38, D-01187 Dresden * Phone: +49 (351) 871-2209 * Fax: +49 (351) 871-1999 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: kernel compilation buggy?
Got it! I update the system and it upgraded initrd-tools, plus I updated the kernel-2.6.11 also. Then I copyed the new default config from /boot and I'm now running it. So, I suppose initrd-tools was buggy... thanks anyway, bye Alberto On May 24, 2005 at 10:01:16AM +0200, Alberto Bert wrote: On May 23, 2005 at 10:03:13PM -0700, Marc Wilson wrote: On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 07:06:31PM +0200, Alberto Bert wrote: I just tryed to compile the 2.6.22 kernel with make-kpkg and the default config file. Is there any indication whatsoever that the default configuration file is appropriate for your hardware? The debian kernel 2.6.11-686 works, so I supposed the .config file should be ok... Am I wrong? It's not the first time I compile the kernel in the debian way. I always used a custom kernel... Alberto -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
kernel compilation buggy?
Hi, I just tryed to compile the 2.6.22 kernel with make-kpkg and the default config file. I doesn't boot giving endless loop with and error apparently related to proc and init. I cannot be more precise cause I don't know where to find back what it was on the console... Is that a known problem of this moment? Do you think 2.6.10 should be more stable? thanks Alberto -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: kernel compilation buggy?
Sorry, I forgot to say that I'm running sid Alberto On May 23, 2005 at 07:06:31PM +0200, Alberto Bert wrote: Hi, I just tryed to compile the 2.6.22 kernel with make-kpkg and the default config file. I doesn't boot giving endless loop with and error apparently related to proc and init. I cannot be more precise cause I don't know where to find back what it was on the console... Is that a known problem of this moment? Do you think 2.6.10 should be more stable? thanks Alberto -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: kernel compilation buggy?
Hello Alberto, I run 2.6.11-ck8 and 2.6.11.2 with no issues. Both compiled with make-kpkg. Could it be a wrong .config file ? Regards, Ionut On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 07:11:00PM +0200, Alberto Bert wrote: Sorry, I forgot to say that I'm running sid Alberto On May 23, 2005 at 07:06:31PM +0200, Alberto Bert wrote: Hi, I just tryed to compile the 2.6.22 kernel with make-kpkg and the default config file. I doesn't boot giving endless loop with and error apparently related to proc and init. I cannot be more precise cause I don't know where to find back what it was on the console... Is that a known problem of this moment? Do you think 2.6.10 should be more stable? thanks Alberto -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- *** * Ionu Georgescu * Max-Planck-Institut fr Physik komplexer Systeme * Noethnitzer Str. 38, D-01187 Dresden * Phone: +49 (351) 871-2209 * Fax: +49 (351) 871-1999 signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: kernel compilation buggy?
On Mon, May 23, 2005 at 07:06:31PM +0200, Alberto Bert wrote: I just tryed to compile the 2.6.22 kernel with make-kpkg and the default config file. Is there any indication whatsoever that the default configuration file is appropriate for your hardware? If you don't know what you're doing, stick to packaged kernels. -- Marc Wilson | Psychology. Mind over matter. Mind under matter? [EMAIL PROTECTED] | It doesn't matter. Never mind. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kernel compilation error
Hello, while trying to compile a module (shfs) for my kernel (compiled from source, version 2.6.5) I got a segmentation fault error. I deleted my kernel-source folder, while keeping a copy of my configuration, and tried to recompile it. I got the same error again, here it is : === make menuconfig /bin/sh: line 1: 9613 Segmentation fault gcc -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -S -o /dev/null -xc /dev/null /dev/null 21 HOSTCC scripts/basic/fixdep /bin/sh: line 1: 9616 Segmentation fault gcc -Wp,-MD,scripts/basic/.fixdep.d -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -o scripts/basic/fixdep scripts/basic/fixdep.c make[1]: *** [scripts/basic/fixdep] Error 139 make: *** [scripts_basic] Error 2 === I was wondering if it was because of a problem of GCC but I know no way of checking this. I'm using debian unstable and made an 'apt-get update;apt-get upgrade' before trying. The problem isn't kernel related since the compilation worked before, and I get the same error with the 2.6.9 sources. Anyone can help me out ? Thanks in advance _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel compilation error
Yes I have, with the latest provided by debian : 2.6.9 The problem seems to be unrelated to the version of the kernel because even module compilation fails, as I stated before. Thanks for helping Hi Have you tried to compile another 2.6.x kernel with your 2.6.5/.config ? Moreover you will have an up to date kernel. Good luck, Rem _ Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel compilation error
I do have all the necessary packages. The thing is that I configured my kernel a couple of months ago (when 2.6.5 was the latest stable kernel version). It worked fine. Yesterday I found shfs module, and while trying to compile it I got this error message. It isn't a normal compilation error, all the more, the message says SEGMENTATION FAULT, which means that something goes wrong, really wrong. I'm wondering if it's my gcc that's having problems. Might have to reinstall it, if that's possible. What can I do to force the compilation with another version of GCC, I seem to have 3 of 4 versions installed (2.9something, 3.3 and 3.4 I think) ? and of course you have all the packages needed to compile a kernel ? gcc kernel-package libncurses5-dev module-init-tools ( pour 2.6 uniquement ) binutils modutils And yes, I saw that the compilation processus failed really early, it's strange, it doesn't look like a wrong configuration with make menuconfig, it's like a bug. _ FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar - get it now! http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel compilation error
I removed some of my gcc's, keeping the gcc-x.x-base files though, they seemed necessary. I tried again, same error. The funny thing, even 'make clean' fails : ... /bin/sh: line 1: 15413 Segmentation fault gcc -D__KERNEL__ -Iinclude -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -pipe -Iinclude/asm-i386/mach-default -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -S -o /dev/null -xc /dev/null /dev/null 21 /bin/sh: line 1: 15420 Segmentation fault gcc -D__KERNEL__ -Iinclude -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -pipe -Iinclude/asm-i386/mach-default -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -S -o /dev/null -xc /dev/null /dev/null 21 ... That's really weird, and starts to worry me a little bit... Something's wrong and I really can't find what it might be... (since apparently it isn't a general gcc bug, I wouldn't be the only one having it...) _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel compilation error
And it seems all my gcc-3.x packages don't work... gcc-2.95 is fine, but too old... _ Don't just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search! http://search.msn.com/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel compilation error
I've managed to reinstall gcc-3.3 (with aptitude), after having cleared my apt cache (apt-get clean) so as to be sure that a correct version would be downloaded... Same problem, segmentation fault when I do 'gcc -v' _ Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
