On Fri, Dec 02, 2005 at 04:30:53AM +, Robin Edwards wrote:
> Went to compile a new 2.6 kernel from scratch today. when i did:
>
> apt-get install kernel-headers
What are you trying to do ? You don't need the kernel-headers to compile a
kernel from scratch, my guess is th
Went to compile a new 2.6 kernel from scratch today. when i did:
apt-get install kernel-headers
i got this:
The following packages have unmet dependencies:
kernel-headers: Depends: kernel-headers-2.6 but it is not going to
be installed
E: Broken packages
tried an apt-get -f install to no
On Mon, 2003-11-17 at 08:15, Jason E. Stewart wrote:
>
> I just went to update subversion to the new 0.33 version (fixes a big
> speed issue with checkout), but suddenly, libc6-dev wants to install
> the linux-kernel-headers package version 2.5.999 ...
>
> What is this packag
Hey,
I just went to update subversion to the new 0.33 version (fixes a big
speed issue with checkout), but suddenly, libc6-dev wants to install
the linux-kernel-headers package version 2.5.999 ...
What is this package?
How is it different from kernel-headers?
I'm concerned because I&
Hi,
Gaudenz Steinlin writes:
> if you compile your kernel with "make-kpkg" you will also get a
> kernel-headers package. Install thisone. You can not use another
> debian kernel-headers package to build mol-modules.
> You can then build mol-modules with "make-kpk
Hi,
Markus Frauenfelder writes:
> -> drivers/mods1.mkext: No such file or directory
> -> drivers/mods2.mkext: No such file or directory
> Fatal error: drivers/bootx is not an ELF image
You need to `apt-get install mol-drivers-macosx' for running Mac OS X
in mol.
> apt-get install mol-o
[EMAIL PROTECTED] hat mal (am Thu, Jul 03, 2003 at 12:17:34PM -0500) gesagt:
> On Thu, 3 Jul 2003, Markus Frauenfelder wrote:
> What kind of troubles? mol works very well on my tibook (2.4.21-ben2), the
> only problem with the new kernel is no acceleration.
at the moment i'm getting:
---snip---
blems in working with mol. I looked for the kernel-headers.
But for 2.4.21 they do not (yet) exist. Are they obsolete or just not yet
released?
thanks
markus
blems in working with mol. I looked for the kernel-headers.
But for 2.4.21 they do not (yet) exist. Are they obsolete or just not yet
released?
thanks
markus
with mol. I looked for the kernel-headers.
> But for 2.4.21 they do not (yet) exist. Are they obsolete or just not yet
> released?
>
What kind of troubles? mol works very well on my tibook (2.4.21-ben2), the
only problem with the new kernel is no acceleration.
The acceleration is maybe a m
Markus Frauenfelder wrote:
Hello
I just installed and compiled benh's 2.4.21-ben2.
It works perfectly on my titanium (even the HD-LED ;-))
if you compile your kernel with "make-kpkg" you will also get a
kernel-headers package. Install thisone. You can not use another debian
Hello
I just installed and compiled benh's 2.4.21-ben2.
It works perfectly on my titanium (even the HD-LED ;-))
As I got some problems in working with mol. I looked for the kernel-headers.
But for 2.4.21 they do not (yet) exist. Are they obsolete or just not yet
released?
thanks
markus
Thanks to everybody who commented on this matter.
I have all the precautions in place (one partition for experimenting
with, and several for normal use---well, I do have 10 gig of disc to
play with :-)).
I guess the only thing left for me to do is to decide if I want to
see yet another spectacul
Andrew Sharp wrote:
> > > >if you have to ask these questions i think you should not be compiling
> > > >libc.
> > > [more snippage]
> > >
> > > Perhaps, but then I would not be able to do some of the things that
> > > I do want to.
> >
> > Namely?
>
> To run software that requires 2.2 without ha
Michel Dänzer wrote:
>
> Kin Chung wrote:
> >
> > >Ethan Benson wrote:
> > >On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 10:01:37PM +0800, Kin Chung wrote:
> > [snip]
> > >what security problem? add potato r3 has all the current libc
> > >security fixes. or is there a new one im not aware of?
> >
> > Oops. I'm runni
> > About the biggest possible risk apart from messing with the kernel.
>
> no much worse, there is no `boot: linux.old' for libc.
But there's a 'boot: linux root=/dev/' I hope. Should I ever
mess with libc, I'd make damn sure there's another bootable root
filesystem on my disk left to use for rep
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 10:23:28AM +0200, Michel Dänzer wrote:
>
> About the biggest possible risk apart from messing with the kernel.
no much worse, there is no `boot: linux.old' for libc.
--
Ethan Benson
http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/
pgpnwklJLrbDC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Kin Chung wrote:
>
> >Ethan Benson wrote:
> >On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 10:01:37PM +0800, Kin Chung wrote:
> [snip]
> >what security problem? add potato r3 has all the current libc
> >security fixes. or is there a new one im not aware of?
>
> Oops. I'm running r2 and there was a security alert in
On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 02:07:39PM +0800, Kin Chung wrote:
> >Ethan Benson wrote:
> >On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 10:01:37PM +0800, Kin Chung wrote:
> [snip]
> >what security problem? add potato r3 has all the current libc
> >security fixes. or is there a new one im not aware of?
>
> Oops. I'm runnin
Ethan Benson wrote:
On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 10:01:37PM +0800, Kin Chung wrote:
[snip]
what security problem? add potato r3 has all the current libc
security fixes. or is there a new one im not aware of?
Oops. I'm running r2 and there was a security alert in April
for glibc 2.1.3-x, for some
On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 10:01:37PM +0800, Kin Chung wrote:
> If this is the wrong place to ask this question, please let
> me know which mailing list is appropriate.
>
> I was trying to recompile glibc, partly because of the security
> problem (and partly for my own masochistic desires), and I fou
ed in the glibc mailing list, but they seem completely
occupied by the 2.2 (?) glibc.
Cheers,
Kin Hoong
*It is noted in the Changes or some such document, but they did
not appear to have been updated in the config files (it still
complains that my kernel headers are older than 2.0.10 when it
act
[ This Cc: line is ridiculous, nice one someone ]
Eric Delaunay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> In order to upload kernel-image along with its sources, should I
> create a dedicated kernel-source-sparc package or requests the diffs
> to be merged into the Debian kernel-source?
No, and no.
> What
Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> Hi,
> >>"Juan" == Juan Cespedes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Juan> On Thu, Jan 22, 1998 at 11:05:25PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava
> Juan> wrote:
> >> Should I change the architecture of the kernel-headers package
>
Hi,
>>"Juan" == Juan Cespedes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Juan> On Thu, Jan 22, 1998 at 11:05:25PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava
Juan> wrote:
>> Should I change the architecture of the kernel-headers package
>> from all to any?
Juan> I think so.
I
Juan Cespedes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Thu, Jan 22, 1998 at 11:05:25PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
> > Should I change the architecture of the kernel-headers package
> > from all to any?
>
> I think so.
>
> Debian supports at least 4
On Thu, Jan 22, 1998 at 11:05:25PM -0600, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>
> Should I change the architecture of the kernel-headers package
> from all to any?
I think so.
Debian supports at least 4 architectures: i386, alpha, m68k
and powerpc. How many of them can us
27 matches
Mail list logo
