Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
On 27 Sep 2000 12:15:41 GMT, Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Keith Owens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> current method of handling multiple configs or machines leaves a bit to >> be desired. > >The best idea is to autmatically add some kind of release number to the >EXTRAVERSION field. Not automatic, more likely add a USER field to uname -r. Leave it up to the kernel builder what they want to put there, most will leave it blank. The first four fields are reserved for Linus, the fifth is anything the kernel builder wants. I can just imagine this make USER=-pre7-vm76-kdb1.5beta1-aa137.2c bzImage modules # uname -r 2.4.0-test9-pre7-vm76-kdb1.5beta1-aa137.2c /lib/modules/2.4.0-test9-pre7-vm76-kdb1.5beta1-aa137.2c/... :) Best take this discussion to linux-kbuild (see MAINTAINERS) if you want to continue. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Christoph Hellwig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> E.g. with this patch, EXTRAVERAVERSION is the rpm release number:
sorry, this was the build number the stuff - the extra version hack
is much simpler:
perl -pi -e 's/EXTRAVERSION/"%{Release}"/;' Makefile
(If you want it)
Christoph
--
Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Keith Owens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Sep 2000 10:43:38 +0200,
> "Butter, Frank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> How about putting these files in the modules directory? That
>>> way, we have a nice consistent location for them.
>>
>>Your assumption is that you have only one config per machine with a certain
>>kernel-release
> current method of handling multiple configs or machines leaves a bit to
> be desired. The ability to cleanly handle multiple configs, multiple
> target systems and do it all from a single source tree is on our
> wishlist for the 2.5 Makefile rewrite.
The best idea is to autmatically add some kind of release number to the
EXTRAVERSION field.
E.g. with this patch, EXTRAVERAVERSION is the rpm release number:
-- snip --
--- linux/Makefile~ Thu Aug 10 10:28:46 2000
+++ linux/Makefile Thu Aug 10 10:32:26 2000
@@ -238,11 +238,7 @@
$(TOPDIR)/include/linux/compile.h: include/linux/compile.h
newversion:
- @if [ ! -f .version ]; then \
- echo 1 > .version; \
- else \
- expr 0`cat .version` + 1 > .version; \
- fi
+ echo RPMRELEASE > .version
include/linux/compile.h: $(CONFIGURATION) include/linux/version.h newversion
@echo -n \#define UTS_VERSION \"\#`cat .version` > .ver
-- snip --
and this specfile snipplet
-- snip --
# set build number to rpm release
perl -pi -e 's/RPMRELEASE/"%{Release}"/;' Makefile
-- snip --
You rpm package release number is your EXTRAVERSION.
(and no, simply echoing it to .version will _not_ work ;))
Christoph
--
Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
On Wed, 27 Sep 2000 10:43:38 +0200,
"Butter, Frank" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> How about putting these files in the modules directory? That
>> way, we have a nice consistent location for them.
>
>Your assumption is that you have only one config per machine with a certain
>kernel-release
Change config
make SUBLEVEL=0-config1 bzImage modules modules_install
Change config
make SUBLEVEL=0-config2 bzImage modules modules_install
creates /lib/modules/x.y.0-config1 and /lib/modules/x.y.0-config2. You
*must* do this to keep modules separate if you want multiple configs
for the same kernel on one machine. If you do not change one of
VERSION, PATCHLEVEL or SUBLEVEL then you have two kernels with the same
value of uname -r which really stuffs up modules.
>and that you are building the kernel for _this_ box.
Edit top level Makefile, uncomment INSTALL_PATH.
Change config.
make INSTALL_PATH=/var/tmp/machine1 INSTALL_MOD_PATH=/var/tmp/machine1 \
bzImage modules install modules_install
Change config.
make INSTALL_PATH=/var/tmp/machine2 INSTALL_MOD_PATH=/var/tmp/machine2 \
bzImage modules install modules_install
Copy /var/tmp/machine{1,2} to target systems. Have a cup of coffee.
The Makefile system is tuned for the common case, one config on a
single machine. But it can handle harder cases. I admit that the
current method of handling multiple configs or machines leaves a bit to
be desired. The ability to cleanly handle multiple configs, multiple
target systems and do it all from a single source tree is on our
wishlist for the 2.5 Makefile rewrite.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Christoph Hellwig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
E.g. with this patch, EXTRAVERAVERSION is the rpm release number:
sorry, this was the build number the stuff - the extra version hack
is much simpler:
perl -pi -e 's/EXTRAVERSION/"%{Release}"/;' Makefile
(If you want it)
Christoph
--
Always remember that you are unique. Just like everyone else.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
On 27 Sep 2000 12:15:41 GMT, Christoph Hellwig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Keith Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: current method of handling multiple configs or machines leaves a bit to be desired. The best idea is to autmatically add some kind of release number to the EXTRAVERSION field. Not automatic, more likely add a USER field to uname -r. Leave it up to the kernel builder what they want to put there, most will leave it blank. The first four fields are reserved for Linus, the fifth is anything the kernel builder wants. I can just imagine this make USER=-pre7-vm76-kdb1.5beta1-aa137.2c bzImage modules # uname -r 2.4.0-test9-pre7-vm76-kdb1.5beta1-aa137.2c /lib/modules/2.4.0-test9-pre7-vm76-kdb1.5beta1-aa137.2c/... :) Best take this discussion to linux-kbuild (see MAINTAINERS) if you want to continue. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Hi! > > This is all to protect those few poor 'administrators' who cannot keep > > track of three separate files. We should not coddle such idiots, if > > they cannot track 3 files they should not be configuring Linux. Okay, so I'm idiot and I should not be configuring Linux? No. I just have too many kernels lying everywhere. -- Philips Velo 1: 1"x4"x8", 300gram, 60, 12MB, 40bogomips, linux, mutt, details at http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/velo/index.html. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Keith Owens wrote: > > On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 14:15:44 +0100 (BST), > James Sutherland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >How about putting these files in the modules directory? That way, we have > >a nice consistent location for them. > > Why do you think modutils 2.3.14 added a prune list of files to ignore > in /lib/modules/`uname -r`? The current (2.3.17) list from modprobe -c is > > # Prune > prune modules.dep > prune modules.pcimap > prune System.map > prune .config > prune build > prune vmlinux > prune vmlinuz > prune bzImage > prune zImage > > The 2.5 Makefiles rewrite will create /lib/modules/`uname -r`, even if > you do not use modules (Hi, Rusty ;) and install the kernel specific > output files in it. There will also be enough information saved in > /lib/modules to allow external compilation of third party software > without having to guess what the kernel compile options were, this > includes module symbol version information. This is all covered in > > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/kbuild/makefile-wishlist-2.5-4.bz2. > > The Makefile rewrite is definitely a 2.5 project, it is too big a > change for 2.4. Whether we rename /lib/modules to /lib/kernel has not > been decided yet. BTW, any discussion about this rewrite should be on > the linux-kbuild list, not linux-kernel (yet). See 2.4.0-test9-pre6 > MAINTAINERS. I'm slowly drifting towards enlightenment on this issue. Let me try to state this in simple terms I can understand: the tree descending from the revision name in the modules directory will contain everything needed to: - Boot and run a given kernel + modules - Reconfigure the same kernel, given the original source tree - Support symbolic crash dumps and debugging And to satisfy these needs the following will be saved in that tree: - Kernel image (one or more of vmlinux, vmlinuz, etc.) - Module tree - Kernel configuration (.config) - Module dependencies - Kernel symbols (System.map) This makes sense to me. This arrangement keeps track of my .config and System.map and gives me a nice mindless 'make install' that does it all. Gosh, we could even put a README in it. The next obvious thing to do is move the whole tree to the /boot directory, leaving just a symbolic link in /lib/modules. I'll stop promoting the idea of tacking a portion of this tree onto the bzImage. This can wait, and if I want it, it would be better to tack on the whole tree anyway, filtered for the parts I don't need. This would give a nice, linear file that I can just cat onto any boot device or feed to lilo in the usual way. It also suggests a way of loading modules using a stub filesystem that knows only about the bzImage. The bottom line is I can stop panicking about this issue and panic about something else instead :-) -- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Keith Owens wrote: On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 14:15:44 +0100 (BST), James Sutherland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about putting these files in the modules directory? That way, we have a nice consistent location for them. Why do you think modutils 2.3.14 added a prune list of files to ignore in /lib/modules/`uname -r`? The current (2.3.17) list from modprobe -c is # Prune prune modules.dep prune modules.pcimap prune System.map prune .config prune build prune vmlinux prune vmlinuz prune bzImage prune zImage The 2.5 Makefiles rewrite will create /lib/modules/`uname -r`, even if you do not use modules (Hi, Rusty ;) and install the kernel specific output files in it. There will also be enough information saved in /lib/modules to allow external compilation of third party software without having to guess what the kernel compile options were, this includes module symbol version information. This is all covered in ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/kbuild/makefile-wishlist-2.5-4.bz2. The Makefile rewrite is definitely a 2.5 project, it is too big a change for 2.4. Whether we rename /lib/modules to /lib/kernel has not been decided yet. BTW, any discussion about this rewrite should be on the linux-kbuild list, not linux-kernel (yet). See 2.4.0-test9-pre6 MAINTAINERS. I'm slowly drifting towards enlightenment on this issue. Let me try to state this in simple terms I can understand: the tree descending from the revision name in the modules directory will contain everything needed to: - Boot and run a given kernel + modules - Reconfigure the same kernel, given the original source tree - Support symbolic crash dumps and debugging And to satisfy these needs the following will be saved in that tree: - Kernel image (one or more of vmlinux, vmlinuz, etc.) - Module tree - Kernel configuration (.config) - Module dependencies - Kernel symbols (System.map) This makes sense to me. This arrangement keeps track of my .config and System.map and gives me a nice mindless 'make install' that does it all. Gosh, we could even put a README in it. The next obvious thing to do is move the whole tree to the /boot directory, leaving just a symbolic link in /lib/modules. I'll stop promoting the idea of tacking a portion of this tree onto the bzImage. This can wait, and if I want it, it would be better to tack on the whole tree anyway, filtered for the parts I don't need. This would give a nice, linear file that I can just cat onto any boot device or feed to lilo in the usual way. It also suggests a way of loading modules using a stub filesystem that knows only about the bzImage. The bottom line is I can stop panicking about this issue and panic about something else instead :-) -- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Hi! This is all to protect those few poor 'administrators' who cannot keep track of three separate files. We should not coddle such idiots, if they cannot track 3 files they should not be configuring Linux. Okay, so I'm idiot and I should not be configuring Linux? No. I just have too many kernels lying everywhere. -- Philips Velo 1: 1"x4"x8", 300gram, 60, 12MB, 40bogomips, linux, mutt, details at http://atrey.karlin.mff.cuni.cz/~pavel/velo/index.html. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 14:15:44 +0100 (BST), James Sutherland <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >How about putting these files in the modules directory? That way, we have >a nice consistent location for them. Why do you think modutils 2.3.14 added a prune list of files to ignore in /lib/modules/`uname -r`? The current (2.3.17) list from modprobe -c is # Prune prune modules.dep prune modules.pcimap prune System.map prune .config prune build prune vmlinux prune vmlinuz prune bzImage prune zImage The 2.5 Makefiles rewrite will create /lib/modules/`uname -r`, even if you do not use modules (Hi, Rusty ;) and install the kernel specific output files in it. There will also be enough information saved in /lib/modules to allow external compilation of third party software without having to guess what the kernel compile options were, this includes module symbol version information. This is all covered in ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/kbuild/makefile-wishlist-2.5-4.bz2. The Makefile rewrite is definitely a 2.5 project, it is too big a change for 2.4. Whether we rename /lib/modules to /lib/kernel has not been decided yet. BTW, any discussion about this rewrite should be on the linux-kbuild list, not linux-kernel (yet). See 2.4.0-test9-pre6 MAINTAINERS. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000, Keith Owens wrote: > On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:33:31 +0200, > Daniel Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I'd just like to remind you of Alan Cox's suggestion about appending > >.config.gz to bzImage so that it doesn't get loaded into memory, and > >my suggestion to put System.map.gz there as well. > > I worry about anything that increases the on disk size of bzImage, even > if the extra data does not get loaded into kernel memory. > > 629590 2.2.16/arch/i386/boot/bzImage > 786273 2.4.0-test8/arch/i386/boot/bzImage > > cat .config System.map | gzip | wc -c > 107591 > > That would take my 2.4.0 bzImage to 893864, it does not leave much room > out of a 1.4Mb floppy for LILO files. We could have multiple make > targets, with and without appended config/map but that just complicates > the build environment. > > This is all to protect those few poor 'administrators' who cannot keep > track of three separate files. We should not coddle such idiots, if > they cannot track 3 files they should not be configuring Linux. > Anybody who loses their config and System.map will learn from their > mistake and only do it once or they will never learn, in which case > they are better off running Windows. > > "Think of it as evolution in action". How about putting these files in the modules directory? That way, we have a nice consistent location for them. /lib/modules/`uname -r`/build/System.map etc. is a fair approximation, but you lose that every time the kernel source is changed, even if the new image isn't installed. James. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000, Keith Owens wrote: On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:33:31 +0200, Daniel Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd just like to remind you of Alan Cox's suggestion about appending .config.gz to bzImage so that it doesn't get loaded into memory, and my suggestion to put System.map.gz there as well. I worry about anything that increases the on disk size of bzImage, even if the extra data does not get loaded into kernel memory. 629590 2.2.16/arch/i386/boot/bzImage 786273 2.4.0-test8/arch/i386/boot/bzImage cat .config System.map | gzip | wc -c 107591 That would take my 2.4.0 bzImage to 893864, it does not leave much room out of a 1.4Mb floppy for LILO files. We could have multiple make targets, with and without appended config/map but that just complicates the build environment. This is all to protect those few poor 'administrators' who cannot keep track of three separate files. We should not coddle such idiots, if they cannot track 3 files they should not be configuring Linux. Anybody who loses their config and System.map will learn from their mistake and only do it once or they will never learn, in which case they are better off running Windows. "Think of it as evolution in action". How about putting these files in the modules directory? That way, we have a nice consistent location for them. /lib/modules/`uname -r`/build/System.map etc. is a fair approximation, but you lose that every time the kernel source is changed, even if the new image isn't installed. James. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 14:15:44 +0100 (BST), James Sutherland [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How about putting these files in the modules directory? That way, we have a nice consistent location for them. Why do you think modutils 2.3.14 added a prune list of files to ignore in /lib/modules/`uname -r`? The current (2.3.17) list from modprobe -c is # Prune prune modules.dep prune modules.pcimap prune System.map prune .config prune build prune vmlinux prune vmlinuz prune bzImage prune zImage The 2.5 Makefiles rewrite will create /lib/modules/`uname -r`, even if you do not use modules (Hi, Rusty ;) and install the kernel specific output files in it. There will also be enough information saved in /lib/modules to allow external compilation of third party software without having to guess what the kernel compile options were, this includes module symbol version information. This is all covered in ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/projects/kbuild/makefile-wishlist-2.5-4.bz2. The Makefile rewrite is definitely a 2.5 project, it is too big a change for 2.4. Whether we rename /lib/modules to /lib/kernel has not been decided yet. BTW, any discussion about this rewrite should be on the linux-kbuild list, not linux-kernel (yet). See 2.4.0-test9-pre6 MAINTAINERS. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Keith Owens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said: [...] > I worry about anything that increases the on disk size of bzImage, even > if the extra data does not get loaded into kernel memory. > > 629590 2.2.16/arch/i386/boot/bzImage > 786273 2.4.0-test8/arch/i386/boot/bzImage > > cat .config System.map | gzip | wc -c > 107591 > > That would take my 2.4.0 bzImage to 893864, it does not leave much room > out of a 1.4Mb floppy for LILO files. We could have multiple make > targets, with and without appended config/map but that just complicates > the build environment. Boot floppies shouldn't use "full" kernels with bells and whistles in any case. > This is all to protect those few poor 'administrators' who cannot keep > track of three separate files. We should not coddle such idiots, if > they cannot track 3 files they should not be configuring Linux. > Anybody who loses their config and System.map will learn from their > mistake and only do it once or they will never learn, in which case > they are better off running Windows. Very true. -- Horst von Brand [EMAIL PROTECTED] Casilla 9G, Vin~a del Mar, Chile +56 32 672616 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000, David Ford wrote: > Keith Owens wrote: > > > That would take my 2.4.0 bzImage to 893864, it does not leave much room > > out of a 1.4Mb floppy for LILO files. We could have multiple make > > targets, with and without appended config/map but that just complicates > > the build environment. > > I normally occupy over a meg with my image and I frequently build a LILO boot > disk for safekeeping. I strip my config down to only enabled options and > further strip the CONFIG_ from it, then bzip2 -s -9 the both of config and > system map and it comes out to about 122K > > > > This is all to protect those few poor 'administrators' who cannot keep > > track of three separate files. We should not coddle such idiots, if > > they cannot track 3 files they should not be configuring Linux. > > Anybody who loses their config and System.map will learn from their > > mistake and only do it once or they will never learn, in which case > > they are better off running Windows. > > The same idiots who have multiple patch trees that haven't been merged and > different builds of a kernel to test effects? I.e. those who really do the > work on LKML? > > > > "Think of it as evolution in action". > > After you're looking down the ladder of evolution, think to look up the > ladder. > > Personally, /proc/ksyms has what I need for symbols but 1.3K for a .config is > trivial enough to add to the image. Some people want this, and some people dont. Make it configurable (as people already told) and the discussion is over. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Keith Owens wrote: > That would take my 2.4.0 bzImage to 893864, it does not leave much room > out of a 1.4Mb floppy for LILO files. We could have multiple make > targets, with and without appended config/map but that just complicates > the build environment. I normally occupy over a meg with my image and I frequently build a LILO boot disk for safekeeping. I strip my config down to only enabled options and further strip the CONFIG_ from it, then bzip2 -s -9 the both of config and system map and it comes out to about 122K > This is all to protect those few poor 'administrators' who cannot keep > track of three separate files. We should not coddle such idiots, if > they cannot track 3 files they should not be configuring Linux. > Anybody who loses their config and System.map will learn from their > mistake and only do it once or they will never learn, in which case > they are better off running Windows. The same idiots who have multiple patch trees that haven't been merged and different builds of a kernel to test effects? I.e. those who really do the work on LKML? > "Think of it as evolution in action". After you're looking down the ladder of evolution, think to look up the ladder. Personally, /proc/ksyms has what I need for symbols but 1.3K for a .config is trivial enough to add to the image. -d -- "The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an eggs-and-ham breakfast: the chicken was 'involved' - the pig was 'committed'." begin:vcard n:Ford;David x-mozilla-html:TRUE org:http://www.kalifornia.com/images/paradise.jpg"> adr:;; version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Blue Labs Developer x-mozilla-cpt:;-12480 fn:David Ford end:vcard
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
> On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:33:31 +0200, > Daniel Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I'd just like to remind you of Alan Cox's suggestion about appending > >.config.gz to bzImage so that it doesn't get loaded into memory, and > >my suggestion to put System.map.gz there as well. > > I worry about anything that increases the on disk size of bzImage, even > if the extra data does not get loaded into kernel memory. > > 629590 2.2.16/arch/i386/boot/bzImage > 786273 2.4.0-test8/arch/i386/boot/bzImage > > cat .config System.map | gzip | wc -c > 107591 Definitely, this feature should be optional. > This is all to protect those few poor 'administrators' who cannot keep > track of three separate files. We should not coddle such idiots, if > they cannot track 3 files they should not be configuring Linux. Did you ever try to manage ~50 different kernels built from the same source tree ? 3 * 50 = 150 Andrzej - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Andreas Haumer wrote: > > Keith Owens wrote: > > > > I worry about anything that increases the on disk size of bzImage, even > > if the extra data does not get loaded into kernel memory. > > > You also have to consider filesize restrictions with some > network bootproms loading the kernel image with TFTP. > > At least, that feature should be optional! Yes, it could be two config options: bzImage includes System map bzImage includes System config But actually we're not talking about a kernel build option at all, we're just talking about cat'ing one or two gzip files onto the end of bzImage, and so the only reason for making it a config option would be for taking care of really clueless people like me who don't know that. Otherwise it would just be a little script or perhaps an option on 'make install'. -- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Keith Owens wrote: > Daniel Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'd just like to remind you of Alan Cox's suggestion about appending > > .config.gz to bzImage so that it doesn't get loaded into memory, and > > my suggestion to put System.map.gz there as well. > > I worry about anything that increases the on disk size of bzImage, even > if the extra data does not get loaded into kernel memory. > > 629590 2.2.16/arch/i386/boot/bzImage > 786273 2.4.0-test8/arch/i386/boot/bzImage > > cat .config System.map | gzip | wc -c > 107591 > > That would take my 2.4.0 bzImage to 893864, it does not leave much room > out of a 1.4Mb floppy for LILO files. We could have multiple make > targets, with and without appended config/map but that just complicates > the build environment. This is no argument when talking about hard disks. You are talking only about floppy disks. I think you are smart enough to leave out the gzip files if you are building for a floppy. The zipped .config is considerably smaller than the system map, only about 4K in size. Surely you would have no problem with that? > Anybody who loses their config and System.map will learn from their > mistake and only do it once or they will never learn, in which case > they are better off running Windows. > > "Think of it as evolution in action". OK, I'm thinking about it that way. I concluded that somebody who accidently selects both the 'bzImage includes System map' and 'bzImage includes System config' options then complains that the boot file is too big needs to be selected out. Please note that when you're talking about idiots you're talking about people like me and Alan, and we idiots resent that. ;-) -- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000, Keith Owens wrote: > I worry about anything that increases the on disk size of bzImage, even > if the extra data does not get loaded into kernel memory. > > 629590 2.2.16/arch/i386/boot/bzImage > 786273 2.4.0-test8/arch/i386/boot/bzImage > > cat .config System.map | gzip | wc -c > 107591 > > That would take my 2.4.0 bzImage to 893864, it does not leave much room > out of a 1.4Mb floppy for LILO files. So (a) make it optional during the configuration stage, (b) extend strip or some other user-land tool to rip 'em off afterwards for the corner cases that don't want them, or (c) do both (a) and (b). > This is all to protect those few poor 'administrators' who cannot keep > track of three separate files. We should not coddle such idiots, if > they cannot track 3 files they should not be configuring Linux. By reductio ad absurdum, we should also get rid of gcc. It's just coddling the idiots who can't do everything in assembly, after all, and therefore shouldn't be programming Linux If appending them doesn't hurt anything, and makes life easier for people, why not? It'd certainly make life easier for both kernel developers (since bug report quality will increase with the lowered chance of said idiots using the wrong System.map / no System.map) and for the ksymoops maintainer (since you'll finally have one standard place to have it look for System.map). Granted, there are other ways to do the same thing. We could, for example, combine what's now /boot and /lib/modules into one directory like /lib/kernel, and have make install drop bzImage, System.map, .config, and modules in /lib/kernel/'uname -r'/ . People would have to mount /lib/kernel as a separate partition like they currently do /boot, and they'd have to modify lilo.conf, ksymoops, and modutils, but after that it would work and we'd still have a semi-idiocy-proof standard > "Think of it as evolution in action". *shrug* It's "evolution in action" to append .config / System.map to bzImage as well. What's your point? later, chris -- Chris Ricker [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Hi! Keith Owens wrote: > > On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:33:31 +0200, > Daniel Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I'd just like to remind you of Alan Cox's suggestion about appending > >.config.gz to bzImage so that it doesn't get loaded into memory, and > >my suggestion to put System.map.gz there as well. > > I worry about anything that increases the on disk size of bzImage, even > if the extra data does not get loaded into kernel memory. > You also have to consider filesize restrictions with some network bootproms loading the kernel image with TFTP. At least, that feature should be optional! My 0,02 EUR... - andreas -- Andreas Haumer | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *x Software + Systeme | http://www.xss.co.at/ Karmarschgasse 51/2/20 | Tel: +43-1-6060114-0 A-1100 Vienna, Austria | Fax: +43-1-6060114-71 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:33:31 +0200, Daniel Phillips <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I'd just like to remind you of Alan Cox's suggestion about appending >.config.gz to bzImage so that it doesn't get loaded into memory, and >my suggestion to put System.map.gz there as well. I worry about anything that increases the on disk size of bzImage, even if the extra data does not get loaded into kernel memory. 629590 2.2.16/arch/i386/boot/bzImage 786273 2.4.0-test8/arch/i386/boot/bzImage cat .config System.map | gzip | wc -c 107591 That would take my 2.4.0 bzImage to 893864, it does not leave much room out of a 1.4Mb floppy for LILO files. We could have multiple make targets, with and without appended config/map but that just complicates the build environment. This is all to protect those few poor 'administrators' who cannot keep track of three separate files. We should not coddle such idiots, if they cannot track 3 files they should not be configuring Linux. Anybody who loses their config and System.map will learn from their mistake and only do it once or they will never learn, in which case they are better off running Windows. "Think of it as evolution in action". - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Keith Owens wrote: > On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 17:09:27 +0800 (CST), > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >I would like to upgrade my kernel which is bundled with Red Hat. > > Ask redhat for the .config, this is not a problem for the linux-kernel list. I'd just like to remind you of Alan Cox's suggestion about appending .config.gz to bzImage so that it doesn't get loaded into memory, and my suggestion to put System.map.gz there as well. -- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Keith Owens wrote: On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 17:09:27 +0800 (CST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to upgrade my kernel which is bundled with Red Hat. Ask redhat for the .config, this is not a problem for the linux-kernel list. I'd just like to remind you of Alan Cox's suggestion about appending .config.gz to bzImage so that it doesn't get loaded into memory, and my suggestion to put System.map.gz there as well. -- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:33:31 +0200, Daniel Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd just like to remind you of Alan Cox's suggestion about appending .config.gz to bzImage so that it doesn't get loaded into memory, and my suggestion to put System.map.gz there as well. I worry about anything that increases the on disk size of bzImage, even if the extra data does not get loaded into kernel memory. 629590 2.2.16/arch/i386/boot/bzImage 786273 2.4.0-test8/arch/i386/boot/bzImage cat .config System.map | gzip | wc -c 107591 That would take my 2.4.0 bzImage to 893864, it does not leave much room out of a 1.4Mb floppy for LILO files. We could have multiple make targets, with and without appended config/map but that just complicates the build environment. This is all to protect those few poor 'administrators' who cannot keep track of three separate files. We should not coddle such idiots, if they cannot track 3 files they should not be configuring Linux. Anybody who loses their config and System.map will learn from their mistake and only do it once or they will never learn, in which case they are better off running Windows. "Think of it as evolution in action". - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Hi! Keith Owens wrote: On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 11:33:31 +0200, Daniel Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd just like to remind you of Alan Cox's suggestion about appending .config.gz to bzImage so that it doesn't get loaded into memory, and my suggestion to put System.map.gz there as well. I worry about anything that increases the on disk size of bzImage, even if the extra data does not get loaded into kernel memory. You also have to consider filesize restrictions with some network bootproms loading the kernel image with TFTP. At least, that feature should be optional! My 0,02 EUR... - andreas -- Andreas Haumer | mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *x Software + Systeme | http://www.xss.co.at/ Karmarschgasse 51/2/20 | Tel: +43-1-6060114-0 A-1100 Vienna, Austria | Fax: +43-1-6060114-71 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000, Keith Owens wrote: I worry about anything that increases the on disk size of bzImage, even if the extra data does not get loaded into kernel memory. 629590 2.2.16/arch/i386/boot/bzImage 786273 2.4.0-test8/arch/i386/boot/bzImage cat .config System.map | gzip | wc -c 107591 That would take my 2.4.0 bzImage to 893864, it does not leave much room out of a 1.4Mb floppy for LILO files. So (a) make it optional during the configuration stage, (b) extend strip or some other user-land tool to rip 'em off afterwards for the corner cases that don't want them, or (c) do both (a) and (b). This is all to protect those few poor 'administrators' who cannot keep track of three separate files. We should not coddle such idiots, if they cannot track 3 files they should not be configuring Linux. By reductio ad absurdum, we should also get rid of gcc. It's just coddling the idiots who can't do everything in assembly, after all, and therefore shouldn't be programming Linux If appending them doesn't hurt anything, and makes life easier for people, why not? It'd certainly make life easier for both kernel developers (since bug report quality will increase with the lowered chance of said idiots using the wrong System.map / no System.map) and for the ksymoops maintainer (since you'll finally have one standard place to have it look for System.map). Granted, there are other ways to do the same thing. We could, for example, combine what's now /boot and /lib/modules into one directory like /lib/kernel, and have make install drop bzImage, System.map, .config, and modules in /lib/kernel/'uname -r'/ . People would have to mount /lib/kernel as a separate partition like they currently do /boot, and they'd have to modify lilo.conf, ksymoops, and modutils, but after that it would work and we'd still have a semi-idiocy-proof standard "Think of it as evolution in action". *shrug* It's "evolution in action" to append .config / System.map to bzImage as well. What's your point? later, chris -- Chris Ricker [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Keith Owens wrote: Daniel Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd just like to remind you of Alan Cox's suggestion about appending .config.gz to bzImage so that it doesn't get loaded into memory, and my suggestion to put System.map.gz there as well. I worry about anything that increases the on disk size of bzImage, even if the extra data does not get loaded into kernel memory. 629590 2.2.16/arch/i386/boot/bzImage 786273 2.4.0-test8/arch/i386/boot/bzImage cat .config System.map | gzip | wc -c 107591 That would take my 2.4.0 bzImage to 893864, it does not leave much room out of a 1.4Mb floppy for LILO files. We could have multiple make targets, with and without appended config/map but that just complicates the build environment. This is no argument when talking about hard disks. You are talking only about floppy disks. I think you are smart enough to leave out the gzip files if you are building for a floppy. The zipped .config is considerably smaller than the system map, only about 4K in size. Surely you would have no problem with that? Anybody who loses their config and System.map will learn from their mistake and only do it once or they will never learn, in which case they are better off running Windows. "Think of it as evolution in action". OK, I'm thinking about it that way. I concluded that somebody who accidently selects both the 'bzImage includes System map' and 'bzImage includes System config' options then complains that the boot file is too big needs to be selected out. Please note that when you're talking about idiots you're talking about people like me and Alan, and we idiots resent that. ;-) -- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Andreas Haumer wrote: Keith Owens wrote: I worry about anything that increases the on disk size of bzImage, even if the extra data does not get loaded into kernel memory. You also have to consider filesize restrictions with some network bootproms loading the kernel image with TFTP. At least, that feature should be optional! Yes, it could be two config options: bzImage includes System map bzImage includes System config But actually we're not talking about a kernel build option at all, we're just talking about cat'ing one or two gzip files onto the end of bzImage, and so the only reason for making it a config option would be for taking care of really clueless people like me who don't know that. Otherwise it would just be a little script or perhaps an option on 'make install'. -- Daniel - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Keith Owens wrote: That would take my 2.4.0 bzImage to 893864, it does not leave much room out of a 1.4Mb floppy for LILO files. We could have multiple make targets, with and without appended config/map but that just complicates the build environment. I normally occupy over a meg with my image and I frequently build a LILO boot disk for safekeeping. I strip my config down to only enabled options and further strip the CONFIG_ from it, then bzip2 -s -9 the both of config and system map and it comes out to about 122K This is all to protect those few poor 'administrators' who cannot keep track of three separate files. We should not coddle such idiots, if they cannot track 3 files they should not be configuring Linux. Anybody who loses their config and System.map will learn from their mistake and only do it once or they will never learn, in which case they are better off running Windows. The same idiots who have multiple patch trees that haven't been merged and different builds of a kernel to test effects? I.e. those who really do the work on LKML? "Think of it as evolution in action". After you're looking down the ladder of evolution, think to look up the ladder. Personally, /proc/ksyms has what I need for symbols but 1.3K for a .config is trivial enough to add to the image. -d -- "The difference between 'involvement' and 'commitment' is like an eggs-and-ham breakfast: the chicken was 'involved' - the pig was 'committed'." begin:vcard n:Ford;David x-mozilla-html:TRUE org:img src="http://www.kalifornia.com/images/paradise.jpg" adr:;; version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:Blue Labs Developer x-mozilla-cpt:;-12480 fn:David Ford end:vcard
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000, David Ford wrote: Keith Owens wrote: That would take my 2.4.0 bzImage to 893864, it does not leave much room out of a 1.4Mb floppy for LILO files. We could have multiple make targets, with and without appended config/map but that just complicates the build environment. I normally occupy over a meg with my image and I frequently build a LILO boot disk for safekeeping. I strip my config down to only enabled options and further strip the CONFIG_ from it, then bzip2 -s -9 the both of config and system map and it comes out to about 122K This is all to protect those few poor 'administrators' who cannot keep track of three separate files. We should not coddle such idiots, if they cannot track 3 files they should not be configuring Linux. Anybody who loses their config and System.map will learn from their mistake and only do it once or they will never learn, in which case they are better off running Windows. The same idiots who have multiple patch trees that haven't been merged and different builds of a kernel to test effects? I.e. those who really do the work on LKML? "Think of it as evolution in action". After you're looking down the ladder of evolution, think to look up the ladder. Personally, /proc/ksyms has what I need for symbols but 1.3K for a .config is trivial enough to add to the image. Some people want this, and some people dont. Make it configurable (as people already told) and the discussion is over. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Keith Owens [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: [...] I worry about anything that increases the on disk size of bzImage, even if the extra data does not get loaded into kernel memory. 629590 2.2.16/arch/i386/boot/bzImage 786273 2.4.0-test8/arch/i386/boot/bzImage cat .config System.map | gzip | wc -c 107591 That would take my 2.4.0 bzImage to 893864, it does not leave much room out of a 1.4Mb floppy for LILO files. We could have multiple make targets, with and without appended config/map but that just complicates the build environment. Boot floppies shouldn't use "full" kernels with bells and whistles in any case. This is all to protect those few poor 'administrators' who cannot keep track of three separate files. We should not coddle such idiots, if they cannot track 3 files they should not be configuring Linux. Anybody who loses their config and System.map will learn from their mistake and only do it once or they will never learn, in which case they are better off running Windows. Very true. -- Horst von Brand [EMAIL PROTECTED] Casilla 9G, Vin~a del Mar, Chile +56 32 672616 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
> I would like to upgrade my kernel which is bundled with Red Hat. However, > I don't want to lose modules/functions it has complied. How can I do > it? Is there any command to check the current config and how can I check > the modules it has as well? The Red Hat bundled source rpm package contains the .config files, patches and all pieces to build the kernels. This ought to go to a Red Hat list though.. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
I would like to upgrade my kernel which is bundled with Red Hat. However, I don't want to lose modules/functions it has complied. How can I do it? Is there any command to check the current config and how can I check the modules it has as well? The Red Hat bundled source rpm package contains the .config files, patches and all pieces to build the kernels. This ought to go to a Red Hat list though.. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
** Reply to message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 20 Sep 2000 17:09:27 +0800 (CST) > I would like to upgrade my kernel which is bundled with Red Hat. However, > I don't want to lose modules/functions it has complied. How can I do > it? Is there any command to check the current config and how can I check > the modules it has as well? "make oldconfig" gets you 99% there. For some reason, it got the network adapter wrong, but otherwise it appeared to be correct. -- Timur Tabi - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Interactive Silicon - http://www.interactivesi.com When replying to a mailing-list message, please don't cc: me, because then I'll just get two copies of the same message. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Grab the kernel source rpm and install it. Once install you can find various configs in /usr/src/linux/configs/. I'm not sure if they include this will all sources. The last one I checked was 2.2.14 before modifying to my liking. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Dear all, > > I would like to upgrade my kernel which is bundled with Red Hat. However, > I don't want to lose modules/functions it has complied. How can I do > it? Is there any command to check the current config and how can I check > the modules it has as well? > > Many thanks!!! > > Best regards, > Boris > -- = Mohammad A. Haque http://www.haque.net/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Alcohol and calculus don't mix. Project Lead Don't drink and derive." --Unknown http://wm.themes.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] = - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
[<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>] > >I would like to upgrade my kernel which is bundled with Red Hat. [kaos] > Ask redhat for the .config, this is not a problem for the > linux-kernel list. Also you might make sure you have any relevant RH patches installed. Not being a RH user, I don't know which ones those would be. Peter - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 17:09:27 +0800 (CST), <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >I would like to upgrade my kernel which is bundled with Red Hat. Ask redhat for the .config, this is not a problem for the linux-kernel list. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
On Wed, 20 Sep 2000 17:09:27 +0800 (CST), [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to upgrade my kernel which is bundled with Red Hat. Ask redhat for the .config, this is not a problem for the linux-kernel list. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
[[EMAIL PROTECTED]] I would like to upgrade my kernel which is bundled with Red Hat. [kaos] Ask redhat for the .config, this is not a problem for the linux-kernel list. Also you might make sure you have any relevant RH patches installed. Not being a RH user, I don't know which ones those would be. Peter - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
Grab the kernel source rpm and install it. Once install you can find various configs in /usr/src/linux/configs/. I'm not sure if they include this will all sources. The last one I checked was 2.2.14 before modifying to my liking. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dear all, I would like to upgrade my kernel which is bundled with Red Hat. However, I don't want to lose modules/functions it has complied. How can I do it? Is there any command to check the current config and how can I check the modules it has as well? Many thanks!!! Best regards, Boris -- = Mohammad A. Haque http://www.haque.net/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] "Alcohol and calculus don't mix. Project Lead Don't drink and derive." --Unknown http://wm.themes.org/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] = - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: Given an image, how can show its config?
** Reply to message from [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 20 Sep 2000 17:09:27 +0800 (CST) I would like to upgrade my kernel which is bundled with Red Hat. However, I don't want to lose modules/functions it has complied. How can I do it? Is there any command to check the current config and how can I check the modules it has as well? "make oldconfig" gets you 99% there. For some reason, it got the network adapter wrong, but otherwise it appeared to be correct. -- Timur Tabi - [EMAIL PROTECTED] Interactive Silicon - http://www.interactivesi.com When replying to a mailing-list message, please don't cc: me, because then I'll just get two copies of the same message. - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
