Re: problems for making kernel module
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 09:20:32AM +0900, ��û�� wrote: I got this message during compiling module. Building modules, stage 2. MODPOST WARNING: tasklist_lock [ /Red/src/Red.ko] undefined! make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.18-4-686' (There's 2.6.18-6-686 , BTW.) Actually, Red.ko had made but can not load the module due to the unknown symbol (tasklist_lock). Are there any warnings at build time? (Where exactly is that symbol exported in 2.6.18?) What��s the problem?? I can see the symbol is exported in the linux-header-2.6.18-4-686/include/linux/sched.h. I couldn��t understand why it is shown ��undefined��?? Also during searching about this problem, I read this - for linux kernel 2.6.18, the symbol does NOT export any more ��. Is this right??? If it is, is there any way to use the symbol ��tasklist_lock��? There is my only guess, it is needed the license to use this symbol. Thanks a lot for any suggestion. -- Tzafrir Cohen | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | VIM is http://tzafrir.org.il || a Mutt's [EMAIL PROTECTED] || best ICQ# 16849754 || friend -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: problems for making kernel module
I'm working with kernel 2.6.18-4-686 I checked out the symbol is exported in file /lib/modules/2.6.18-4-686/build/include/linux/sched.h. What warning?? About the above symbol? Actually NO! Thanks a lot for your help~ :-) -Original Message- From: Tzafrir Cohen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, April 28, 2008 5:32 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: problems for making kernel module On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 09:20:32AM +0900, ��û�� wrote: I got this message during compiling module. Building modules, stage 2. MODPOST WARNING: tasklist_lock [ /Red/src/Red.ko] undefined! make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.18-4-686' (There's 2.6.18-6-686 , BTW.) Actually, Red.ko had made but can not load the module due to the unknown symbol (tasklist_lock). Are there any warnings at build time? (Where exactly is that symbol exported in 2.6.18?) Whats the problem?? I can see the symbol is exported in the linux-header-2.6.18-4-686/include/linux/sched.h. I couldnt understand why it is shown undefined?? Also during searching about this problem, I read this - for linux kernel 2.6.18, the symbol does NOT export any more . Is this right??? If it is, is there any way to use the symbol tasklist_lock? There is my only guess, it is needed the license to use this symbol. Thanks a lot for any suggestion. -- Tzafrir Cohen | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | VIM is http://tzafrir.org.il || a Mutt's [EMAIL PROTECTED] || best ICQ# 16849754 || friend
problems for making kernel module
I got this message during compiling module. Building modules, stage 2. MODPOST WARNING: tasklist_lock [ /Red/src/Red.ko] undefined! make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.18-4-686' Actually, Red.ko had made but can not load the module due to the unknown symbol (tasklist_lock). What’s the problem?? I can see the symbol is exported in the linux-header-2.6.18-4-686/include/linux/sched.h. I couldn’t understand why it is shown “undefined”?? Also during searching about this problem, I read this - for linux kernel 2.6.18, the symbol does NOT export any more …. Is this right??? If it is, is there any way to use the symbol ‘tasklist_lock’? There is my only guess, it is needed the license to use this symbol. Thanks a lot for any suggestion.
Re: Making kernel 2.6.18
David Baron wrote: Manually putting in the symlink worked. 2.6.18 is up and running. Easily build the kqemu and, using m-a all the other added kernel models. And yes, Nvidia's installer CAN be easily used with multiple kernels and even cross-compile (read their advanced options). I'll keep 2.6.17 around for a few days just in case but so far so good! Good. I am holding off. There are reports in the suspend2-devel list that the 2.6.18 version causes paging problems. I am now in resume #26 from a boot on the 18th. H -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Making kernel 2.6.18
On Wednesday 27 September 2006 16:20, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote: David Baron wrote: Manually putting in the symlink worked. 2.6.18 is up and running. Easily build the kqemu and, using m-a all the other added kernel models. And yes, Nvidia's installer CAN be easily used with multiple kernels and even cross-compile (read their advanced options). I'll keep 2.6.17 around for a few days just in case but so far so good! Good. I am holding off. There are reports in the suspend2-devel list that the 2.6.18 version causes paging problems. I am now in resume #26 from a boot on the 18th. I have never used suspend. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Making kernel 2.6.18
On Tuesday 26 September 2006 17:47, Arthur Marsh wrote: David Baron wrote, On 2006-09-26 23:42: On Tuesday 26 September 2006 02:54, Arthur Marsh wrote: Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote, On 2006-09-26 03:49: David Baron wrote: I recall others have had a problem with this as well. Looks for the asm/socket.h file. This is very often a problem on a clean(ed) build, usually solved by running a make until c files are actually being compiled and then stopping it. Then one could go on with whatever makekpkg one was doing. This no longer works. The blank make complains about no rule to make include/config/auto.conf needed by include/config/kernel.release. There is no include/config directory being created. kernel-package version? Most recent from Sid, 10.057 I had no trouble building a kernel from linux-source-2.6.18-1 with kernel-package 10.057 last night. I had copied /boot/config-2.6.17-2-686 to /usr/src/linux/.config run make menuconfig Did that. This also kicks about the same asm/socket.h. Maybe I should just copy this file from somewhere--where? Should probably symlink to include/asm-i386/socket.h or link include/asm to asm-i386? This is what was in my 2.6.17 so did that hmmm... what version of gcc are you using? dmesg on my machine reports: Linux version 2.6.18 (2.6.18-10.00.Custom) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 4.1.2 20060901 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-13)) #1 SMP PREEMPT Mon Sep 25 15:47:14 CST 2006 I did not upgrade gcc today because I am using the current (previous upgraded) version from Sid. The socket.h files I have include: /usr/include/asm-i486/socket.h /usr/include/asm-x86_64/socket.h /usr/include/asm/socket.h /usr/src/linux-source-2.6.17/include/asm-i386/socket.h /usr/src/linux-source-2.6.18/include/asm-i386/socket.h As I said, the bug was that the kernel make did not create the symlink of /usr/src/linux-source-2.6.18/include/asm -- /usr/src/linux-source-2.6.18/include/asm-i386 The architecture requested is certainly in .config. Anything special? Should I report it? running make bare will now poll for NEW features. Mostly will take defaults. made one or 2 changes and saved the result, then time make-kpkg --initrd linux-image What is time? Anyway, with the symlink, things are proceeding. Thanks. From the bash man page: If the time reserved word precedes a pipeline, the elapsed as well as user and system time consumed by its execution are reported when the pipeline terminates. OK, just a system time usage reporter. Never used it. SO was not needed to get the make-kpkg (10.058 now on Sid, didn't take it yet either) to work. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Making kernel 2.6.18
David Baron wrote, On 2006-09-26 23:42: On Tuesday 26 September 2006 02:54, Arthur Marsh wrote: Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote, On 2006-09-26 03:49: David Baron wrote: I recall others have had a problem with this as well. Looks for the asm/socket.h file. This is very often a problem on a clean(ed) build, usually solved by running a make until c files are actually being compiled and then stopping it. Then one could go on with whatever makekpkg one was doing. This no longer works. The blank make complains about no rule to make include/config/auto.conf needed by include/config/kernel.release. There is no include/config directory being created. kernel-package version? Most recent from Sid, 10.057 I had no trouble building a kernel from linux-source-2.6.18-1 with kernel-package 10.057 last night. I had copied /boot/config-2.6.17-2-686 to /usr/src/linux/.config run make menuconfig Did that. This also kicks about the same asm/socket.h. Maybe I should just copy this file from somewhere--where? Should probably symlink to include/asm-i386/socket.h or link include/asm to asm-i386? This is what was in my 2.6.17 so did that hmmm... what version of gcc are you using? dmesg on my machine reports: Linux version 2.6.18 (2.6.18-10.00.Custom) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) (gcc version 4.1.2 20060901 (prerelease) (Debian 4.1.1-13)) #1 SMP PREEMPT Mon Sep 25 15:47:14 CST 2006 The socket.h files I have include: /usr/include/asm-i486/socket.h /usr/include/asm-x86_64/socket.h /usr/include/asm/socket.h /usr/src/linux-source-2.6.17/include/asm-i386/socket.h /usr/src/linux-source-2.6.18/include/asm-i386/socket.h running make bare will now poll for NEW features. Mostly will take defaults. made one or 2 changes and saved the result, then time make-kpkg --initrd linux-image What is time? Anyway, with the symlink, things are proceeding. Thanks. From the bash man page: If the time reserved word precedes a pipeline, the elapsed as well as user and system time consumed by its execution are reported when the pipeline terminates. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Making kernel 2.6.18
On Tuesday 26 September 2006 02:54, Arthur Marsh wrote: Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote, On 2006-09-26 03:49: David Baron wrote: I recall others have had a problem with this as well. Looks for the asm/socket.h file. This is very often a problem on a clean(ed) build, usually solved by running a make until c files are actually being compiled and then stopping it. Then one could go on with whatever makekpkg one was doing. This no longer works. The blank make complains about no rule to make include/config/auto.conf needed by include/config/kernel.release. There is no include/config directory being created. kernel-package version? Most recent from Sid, 10.057 I had no trouble building a kernel from linux-source-2.6.18-1 with kernel-package 10.057 last night. I had copied /boot/config-2.6.17-2-686 to /usr/src/linux/.config run make menuconfig Did that. This also kicks about the same asm/socket.h. Maybe I should just copy this file from somewhere--where? Should probably symlink to include/asm-i386/socket.h or link include/asm to asm-i386? This is what was in my 2.6.17 so did that running make bare will now poll for NEW features. Mostly will take defaults. made one or 2 changes and saved the result, then time make-kpkg --initrd linux-image What is time? Anyway, with the symlink, things are proceeding. Thanks. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: Making kernel 2.6.18
Manually putting in the symlink worked. 2.6.18 is up and running. Easily build the kqemu and, using m-a all the other added kernel models. And yes, Nvidia's installer CAN be easily used with multiple kernels and even cross-compile (read their advanced options). I'll keep 2.6.17 around for a few days just in case but so far so good! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Making kernel 2.6.18
I recall others have had a problem with this as well. Looks for the asm/socket.h file. This is very often a problem on a clean(ed) build, usually solved by running a make until c files are actually being compiled and then stopping it. Then one could go on with whatever makekpkg one was doing. This no longer works. The blank make complains about no rule to make include/config/auto.conf needed by include/config/kernel.release. There is no include/config directory being created. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Making kernel 2.6.18
David Baron wrote: I recall others have had a problem with this as well. Looks for the asm/socket.h file. This is very often a problem on a clean(ed) build, usually solved by running a make until c files are actually being compiled and then stopping it. Then one could go on with whatever makekpkg one was doing. This no longer works. The blank make complains about no rule to make include/config/auto.conf needed by include/config/kernel.release. There is no include/config directory being created. kernel-package version? H -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Making kernel 2.6.18
Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote, On 2006-09-26 03:49: David Baron wrote: I recall others have had a problem with this as well. Looks for the asm/socket.h file. This is very often a problem on a clean(ed) build, usually solved by running a make until c files are actually being compiled and then stopping it. Then one could go on with whatever makekpkg one was doing. This no longer works. The blank make complains about no rule to make include/config/auto.conf needed by include/config/kernel.release. There is no include/config directory being created. kernel-package version? I had no trouble building a kernel from linux-source-2.6.18-1 with kernel-package 10.057 last night. I had copied /boot/config-2.6.17-2-686 to /usr/src/linux/.config run make menuconfig made one or 2 changes and saved the result, then time make-kpkg --initrd linux-image Arthur. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
problem making kernel - infinite loop
Hi all, I have problems making a 2.6.15 kernel on a debian unstable machine, more precisely Linux seneca 2.6.12-1-686 #1 Tue Sep 27 12:52:50 JST 2005 i686 GNU/Linux The problem is that after saying make, everything that happens is: seneca:/usr/src/linux-source-2.6.15# make CHK include/linux/version.h Linux_2.6.12-1-686 Linux_2.6.12-1-686 Linux_2.6.12-1-686 Linux_2.6.12-1-686 Linux_2.6.12-1-686 Linux_2.6.12-1-686 Linux_2.6.12-1-686 Linux_2.6.12-1-686 ... and so on, infinitely. Searching the web and the archives did not provide anything useful, probably due to my inability of finding unique keywords to describe the problem. Has anybody seen something like this before? Any ideas? Thanks in advance for your help, Eckhart -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Making Kernel
I have been having a problem using make-kpkg to make a debianized kernel. The first time I did this procedure it worked, scripts ran and I ended up with the debian package: make menuconfig make dep make-kpkg -r Custom.1 kernel_image The second time (after I installed the kernel package, found my mistakes and corrected them in make menuconfig) I ran the same sequence I got the following: make: nothing to be done for kernel_image. Question: what dumb thing did I do or not do? Thanks, Mike Mike Bucciarelli, N7CK [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Making Kernel: Addendum
The second time around I also did make clean after make deb. Sorry I left this out. -- Mike Mike Bucciarelli, N7CK [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Making Kernel
Hi, It looks like you forgot to remove or touch the stamp-configure and stamp-image files created by the make-kpkg script in /usr/src/linux. Once you do that, you should be able to recompile without a problem. Also, make-kpkg clean should do it. J. Goldman On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Michael Bucciarelli wrote: I have been having a problem using make-kpkg to make a debianized kernel. The first time I did this procedure it worked, scripts ran and I ended up with the debian package: make menuconfig make dep make-kpkg -r Custom.1 kernel_image The second time (after I installed the kernel package, found my mistakes and corrected them in make menuconfig) I ran the same sequence I got the following: make: nothing to be done for kernel_image. Question: what dumb thing did I do or not do? Thanks, Mike Mike Bucciarelli, N7CK [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Making Kernel
Thanks for the help. Getting rid of the stamp-configure and stamp-image files and doing a make-kpkg clean did the trick. Somebody might want to stick that helpful hint in the FAQ as that was what I was using for documentation to make my kernel package. -- Mike Mike Bucciarelli, N7CK [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Making Kernel: Addendum
On Wed, 9 Jul 1997, Michael Bucciarelli wrote: The second time around I also did make clean after make deb. Sorry I left this out. -- Mike Mike Bucciarelli, N7CK [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Try make-kpkg clean HTH - Mike Schmitz [EMAIL PROTECTED]http://www.bend-or.com/~mschmitz Don't blame me - I voted libertarian!http://www.lp.org/ Use Debian Linux - the free Gnu/Linuxhttp://www.debian.org/ - -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Making Kernel
Hi,
As other people have already mentioned, make-kpkg clean is the
answer (it removes the stamp-* files too). I'd suggest that a perusal
of /usr/doc/kernel-package/{Poblems,README}.gz before building the
kernel (the problems file mentions this, at least i the newer
versions of kernel-package).
manoj
--
In general, it's very hard to protect oneself against omnipotent
beings. Barry Margolin ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 9 Sep 89,
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Manoj Srivastava url:mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Mobile, Alabama USAurl:http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Making kernel using make install
At 12:08 AM 1/19/97 +0100, Thomas Baetzler wrote: Victor Torrico wrote: When making a kernel 2.0.27 I do the following: [clumsy procedure deleted] Actually, on Debian it´s so much nicer to install the kernel-package package. Then you cd to the linux source, make mrproper and make config just once, and then you can always rebuild your kernel by running make-kpkg binary. This´ll give you a new kernel package that contains all you need. dpkg --install it, and so even your Debian system knows which kernel you´re using. ### Okay, I did this and waited a little over an hour for it to get all through and am ready for the dpkg --install part, but I don't have a package called kernel-package.anything anymore, so what package am I installing Regards, Kendrick -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Modules (was Re: Making kernel using make install)
On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, David Wright wrote: Am I right in thinking that a module is a module is a module? In other words, is the sound.o module always the same even though different base addresses/IRQs etc. were configured? Nope. Each time you compile it, differences do occur. You can USE some modules between different kernel versions/compiles, but sometimes you cant. Functionality though, is the same. Symbols usually don't get matched up properly, causing it not to work. -- Daniel Stringfield mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://users.southeast.net/~servo Send email for more information on the Jacksonville Linux Users Group! -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Making kernel using make install
kooij == J P D Kooij [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: kooij Regarding compiling and installing new kernels, kooij I would like to know more about details of installing new kooij (and older) kernels and have an overview of the process as kooij well. IMHO this is something that is not quite exhausively kooij covered in the documentation. The definitive manual for configuring and installing a new kernel is /usr/src/linux/README. By following the directions contained here, and reading the help entries for the individual configurable items when running 'make config', you can make any kind of kernel you want. What more can you ask for? If you want to hack the kernel, see the Kernel Hacker's Guide, by Michael K. Johnson, at the following URL: http://www.redhat.com:8080/HyperNews/get/khg.html kooij But when compiling kernels is kooij addressed, they only tell you to do make this, make kooij that. There's hardly any documentation of what the makefile kooij does, is supposed to do and can do for you. kooij Of course, there's the kernel-HOWTO and it is very good kooij where it makes configuring a new kernel very easy, explains kooij a lot about what the kernel does, how it handles devices, kooij what modules are, where to get the source, how to patch it, kooij etc.. But when it comes down to the final part: installing kooij the kernel, there's not much more than a reference to the kooij lilo manual. I would really like to see some additions made kooij about how the kernel is (or kernels are) embedded in the kooij filesystem. kooij IMHO installkernel(8) and mkboot(8) and are not good enough kooij as the only reference to the install option of the kernel kooij make. The process of installing a new kernal is much to kooij fundamental to linux to be documented only in the huge lilo kooij documentation or the kernel hacking guide. Mere complaining about lack of documentation is not going help anybody, least of all you. If you want something to be improved, ask yourself: how can I help improve this? Remember, nobody's getting paid for the work they do here. -- Nathan L. Cutler Linux Enthusiast http://www.cise.ufl.edu/~nlc -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Making kernel using make install
Victor Torrico wrote: When making a kernel 2.0.27 I do the following: [clumsy procedure deleted] Actually, on Debian it´s so much nicer to install the kernel-package package. Then you cd to the linux source, make mrproper and make config just once, and then you can always rebuild your kernel by running make-kpkg binary. This´ll give you a new kernel package that contains all you need. dpkg --install it, and so even your Debian system knows which kernel you´re using. By the way, if you´ve been looking at the docs, ever tried make menuconfig or make xconfig? Those make it much easier to configure your custom kernel - no more mistyping! The make install is not documented in the /usr/src/linux directory as far as I know but when it is used it seems to put everything from the new kernel where it belongs properly in the /boot directory and lets you update lilo as well. I just tried doing this for the hell of it and it seems to work very well. Is this a new feature? What exactly does make install do? Read the fine Makefile :-) As far as I´ve been able to follow it, it uses a user-supplied script to install the kernel. Guess what, it´s part of the Debian distribution. Still, kernel-package is the way to go. Ciao, -- Thomas Baetzler, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] A HREF=http://home.pages.de/~thb/;thb's Homepage/A -- This message was delayed because the list mail delivery agent was down.
Re: Making kernel using make install
Pete Templin wrote: Ah-hah! Finally, what seems to be a simple sequence of commands for building a new kernel. But what must I do to ensure that my old kernel will continue to work (with its modules), especially if lilo wants to complain that the new kernel is too large? I assume that certain files and directories ought to be backed up or renamed or something, but some pointers to safe kernel testing would be very helpful! If you have problems with Lilo and large Kernels, you can always use make bzlilo instead of make zlilo. By default, the kernel installation will move your old kernel and System.map to *.old. All you need to do to be able to boot into the previous kernel would be to add a boot entry in /etc/lilo.conf. Or you could just cp your stable kernel and the accompanying map to *.stable, and then add an entry for that. Ciao, -- Thomas Baetzler, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] A HREF=http://home.pages.de/~thb/;thb's Homepage/A -- This message was delayed because the list mail delivery agent was down.
Making kernel using make install
When making a kernel 2.0.27 I do the following: make mrproper make config make dep make clean make zImage make modules make modules_install make install The make install is not documented in the /usr/src/linux directory as far as I know but when it is used it seems to put everything from the new kernel where it belongs properly in the /boot directory and lets you update lilo as well. I just tried doing this for the hell of it and it seems to work very well. Is this a new feature? Is it OK to do this or are there possible problems? What exactly does make install do? Victor Torrico -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Making kernel using make install
On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Victor Torrico wrote: When making a kernel 2.0.27 I do the following: make mrproper make config make dep make clean make zImage make modules make modules_install make install The make install is not documented in the /usr/src/linux directory as far as I know but when it is used it seems to put everything from the new kernel where it belongs properly in the /boot directory and lets you update lilo as well. I just tried doing this for the hell of it and it seems to work very well. Ah-hah! Finally, what seems to be a simple sequence of commands for building a new kernel. But what must I do to ensure that my old kernel will continue to work (with its modules), especially if lilo wants to complain that the new kernel is too large? I assume that certain files and directories ought to be backed up or renamed or something, but some pointers to safe kernel testing would be very helpful! --Pete ___ Peter J. Templin, Jr. Client Services Analyst Computer Communication Services tel: (717) 524-1590 Bucknell University [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Making kernel using make install
Victor Torrico [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What exactly does make install do? See installkernel(8) and mkboot(8). Guy -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Making kernel using make install
On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Pete Templin wrote: Hi there, Ah-hah! Finally, what seems to be a simple sequence of commands for building a new kernel. But what must I do to ensure that my old kernel will continue to work (with its modules), especially if lilo wants to complain that the new kernel is too large? I assume that certain files and directories ought to be backed up or renamed or something, but some pointers to safe kernel testing would be very helpful! Every kernel release gets its own direcory in /etc/modules/ So no need to backup the modules. The new directory gets created with make modules_install Yours, -- martin +++ the KDE project mailing lists +++ kde-announce (Announcements)kde (general discussion) kde-devel (Development issues) kde-look (look and feel issues) To subscribe (unsubscribe), send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with empty subject line and subscribe (unsubscribe) [your-email-address] in the message body -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Making kernel using make install
Regarding compiling and installing new kernels, On 17 Jan 1997, Guy Maor wrote: Victor Torrico [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: What exactly does make install do? See installkernel(8) and mkboot(8). Hey, this is not a very elaborate answer. I would like to know more about details of installing new (and older) kernels and have an overview of the process as well. IMHO this is something that is not quite exhausively covered in the documentation. And yes, I did read the lot in the source tree, which is great literature when your kernel won't boot because your XYZ scsi-tape won't bargain with the interface on your DEF souncard because it has the kind of obsolete 456PQ123 chip, so you'll have to hack the source a bit. I also read Running Linux and Raven and I think they're great for everyone who wants to get an overview of linux, especially newbies. But when compiling kernels is addressed, they only tell you to do make this, make that. There's hardly any documentation of what the makefile does, is supposed to do and can do for you. Of course, there's the kernel-HOWTO and it is very good where it makes configuring a new kernel very easy, explains a lot about what the kernel does, how it handles devices, what modules are, where to get the source, how to patch it, etc.. But when it comes down to the final part: installing the kernel, there's not much more than a reference to the lilo manual. I would really like to see some additions made about how the kernel is (or kernels are) embedded in the filesystem. IMHO installkernel(8) and mkboot(8) and are not good enough as the only reference to the install option of the kernel make. The process of installing a new kernal is much to fundamental to linux to be documented only in the huge lilo documentation or the kernel hacking guide. Joost -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Modules (was Re: Making kernel using make install)
On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Martin Konold wrote: Every kernel release gets its own direcory in /etc/modules/ So no need to backup the modules. The new directory gets created with make modules_install Am I right in thinking that a module is a module is a module? In other words, is the sound.o module always the same even though different base addresses/IRQs etc. were configured? David. -- David Wright, Open University, Earth Science Department, Milton Keynes MK7 6AA U.K. email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] tel: +44 1908 653 739 fax: +44 1908 655 151 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Making kernel using make install
On Fri, 17 Jan 1997, Victor Torrico wrote: When making a kernel 2.0.27 I do the following: make mrproper make config make dep make clean make zImage make modules make modules_install make install The make install is not documented in the /usr/src/linux directory as far as I know but when it is used it seems to put everything from the new kernel where it belongs properly in the /boot directory and lets you update lilo as well. I just tried doing this for the hell of it and it seems to work very well. Ah-hah! Finally, what seems to be a simple sequence of commands for building a new kernel. But what must I do to ensure that my old kernel will continue to work (with its modules), especially if lilo wants to complain that the new kernel is too large? I assume that certain files and directories ought to be backed up or renamed or something, but some pointers to safe kernel testing would be very helpful! What I do when I want to upgrade my kernel (which I will be doing later today... 2.0.28 is out) is something like this (assuming that linux-2.0.28.tar.gz is already in /var/tmp, but it could be anywhere, really): tar xzvf linux-2.0.28.tar.gz cd linux cp /usr/src/linux/.config . make-kpkg -revision custom.1.0 kernel_image kernel_source cd .. # rm -rf linux linux-2.0.28.tar.gz dpkg --install kernel-image-2.0.28_custom.1.0_i386.deb dpkg --install kernel-source-2.0.28_custom.1.0_i386.deb dpkg --remove kernel-source-2.0.27_custom.1.0_i386.deb dpkg --remove kernel-image-2.0.26_custom.1.0_i386.deb and that's it. My /etc/lilo.conf has entries for /vmlinux and /vmlinux.old, which are symbolic links that the post-install script for the kernel-image package maintain properly (and reruns lilo as well). I keep one set of installed kernel sources and two installed kernel images. All you need for this is to install the kernel-package package, and it should work. Read the docs in /usr/doc/kernel-package for more information. --Pete ___ Peter J. Templin, Jr. Client Services Analyst Computer Communication Services tel: (717) 524-1590 Bucknell University [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Buddha Buck [EMAIL PROTECTED] Just as the strength of the Internet is chaos, so the strength of our liberty depends upon the chaos and cacaphony of the unfettered speech the First Amendment protects. -- A.L.A. v. U.S. Dept. of Justice -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Error making kernel package
warning, 'debian/tmp-image/DEBIAN/control/' contains user-defined field 'Installed-Size' dpkg-deb: building package 'kernel-image-2.0.25' in '..'. dpkg-deb: ignoring 1 warning about control file(s) dpkg-deb: unable to create '..': Is a directory make: *** [stamp-image] Error 2 Hehe, I got this too. I got a step further. I installed the unstable versions of dpkg and dpkg-dev and the package was made no problems. ButI installed the package and rebooted, but it didn't get past the lilo prompt. I get the lilo prompt, choose the new kernel, but an error message tells me WRONG LOADER, GIVING UP... Now what?!!! I even reran lilo just in case to no avail. TIA, Roger Endo [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~~ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Error making kernel package
Hi Folks - In my never ending saga with Debian Linux and the custom kernel I finally found thanks to help from others on the net dpkg-dev and installed it. When I tried to make the custom kernel package I get the following error: warning, 'debian/tmp-image/DEBIAN/control/' contains user-defined field 'Installed-Size' dpkg-deb: building package 'kernel-image-2.0.25' in '..'. dpkg-deb: ignoring 1 warning about control file(s) dpkg-deb: unable to create '..': Is a directory make: *** [stamp-image] Error 2 Some one please explain this to me. I've done everything as it says in the docs and I can't understand why it is so hard to build a kernel in Debian Linux. While the idea of package handling is good I am beginning to feel a bit frustrated by all this. I don't understand why it has to be so difficult to build a custom kernel. Building a kernel is probably one of the most important things a person would do with his/her linux box and while slackware has received much bad PR recently I can say that building a kernel with it is much easier. Thanks. Juan email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Error making kernel package
Hi, The warning 'debian/tmp-image/DEBIAN/control/' contains user-defined field 'Installed-Size' indicates that you are using the new version of kernel-package, which creates a new style package, with the stable version of dpkg, which does not yet understand it. That is also the problem later when it refuses to build the package with the error dpkg-deb: unable to create '..': Is a directory I think you should upgrade to the latest version of dpkg from frozen (that is rex, I believe), and hopefully your problems will go away. If not, feel free to send me mail. manoj -- Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Error making kernel package
On Fri, 22 Nov 1996, juan j casero wrote: Hi Folks - In my never ending saga with Debian Linux and the custom kernel I finally found thanks to help from others on the net dpkg-dev and installed it. When I tried to make the custom kernel package I get the following error: warning, 'debian/tmp-image/DEBIAN/control/' contains user-defined field 'Installed-Size' dpkg-deb: building package 'kernel-image-2.0.25' in '..'. dpkg-deb: ignoring 1 warning about control file(s) dpkg-deb: unable to create '..': Is a directory make: *** [stamp-image] Error 2 Some one please explain this to me. I've done everything as it says in the docs and I can't understand why it is so hard to build a kernel in Debian Linux. While the idea of package handling is good I am beginning to feel a bit frustrated by all this. I don't understand why it has to be so difficult to build a custom kernel. Building a kernel is probably one of the most important things a person would do with his/her linux box and while slackware has received much bad PR recently I can say that building a kernel with it is much easier. Thanks. Juan email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] They're some useful package in Debian Linux that can really ease things. To make a custom kernel, I simply run the config script in the kernel-source package (by typing make xconfig, make menuconfig, or make config) and then run the ./DEBIAN.rules in the same dir (may be I mistype the name, my source aren't installed). To make a custom-kernel-[source or image or headers] package, download the kernel-package in the misc section. Work pretty well. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
