>
> I wrote the documentation
> for myself and have offered it to the open source community as a
> "here you might find this useful" kind of document. I was then asked
> by one debian user to contribute my documentation to The LDP.
> The submission process involved doing a re-write of my origi
On Tue, 2003-07-01 at 18:33, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 11:31:03AM -0400, Emma Jane Hogbin wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 01:53:40AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > > Sounds like the GFDL. You might want to have a look at debian-legal
> > > archives on this topic; there are un
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 11:33:09PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> However, I'll stop here and not say anything more unless there are
> specific questions; I think I've put forward my point as best I can and
> your licensing decisions are as always yours alone.
I don't think you've put any points for
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 11:31:03AM -0400, Emma Jane Hogbin wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 01:53:40AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > Sounds like the GFDL. You might want to have a look at debian-legal
> > archives on this topic; there are unfortunately various concerns about
> > its freeness as fa
On Monday 30 June 2003 01:57 pm, Andre Berger wrote:
> I'm trying to compile a 2.4.21 kernel on my woody system. I apt-got
> -b kernel-source-2.4.21 and installed all resulting .deb files.
> However when I cd to the source directory
> /usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.21-2.4.21 and do
pile a 2.4.21 kernel on my woody system. I apt-got
> > -b kernel-source-2.4.21 and installed all resulting .deb files.
>=20
> Hmm this is a little strange. What _exactly_ did you do?
Like I said, plus I made a symlink /usr/src/linux to the unpacked
kernel source. Had forgotten to mentio
On Tue, Jul 01, 2003 at 01:53:40AM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> Sounds like the GFDL. You might want to have a look at debian-legal
> archives on this topic; there are unfortunately various concerns about
> its freeness as far as Debian's definition of the term is concerned. :-/
http://lists.debia
HTH
-Original Message-
From: Manoj Srivastava [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 7:23 PM
To: Detelin Batchovski
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Bug#195031: kernel-package
Hi,
There seems to be a mismatch somewhere:
---
* Andre Berger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [030701 10:13]:
> I'm trying to compile a 2.4.21 kernel on my woody system. I apt-got
> -b kernel-source-2.4.21 and installed all resulting .deb files.
Hmm this is a little strange. What _exactly_ did you do?
Normally the steps would be some
On Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 01:10:00PM -0400, Emma Jane Hogbin wrote:
> The XML file I submitted to the LDP is available from
> http://xtrinsic.com/geek/articles/drafts/acpi.xml It will be released
> under the GNU copy left documentation license (the actual name of the
> license escapes me at the momen
--EVF5PPMfhYS0aIcm
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I'm trying to compile a 2.4.21 kernel on my woody system. I apt-got
-b kernel-source-2.4.21 and installed all resulting .deb files.
However when I cd t
On Mon, Jun 30, 2003 at 10:09:12AM +0200, Joerg Johannes wrote:
> I have downloaded the kernel.org source, applied the ACPI patch, then
> downloaded the debian diff.gz and applied it (a few warnings only).
> Then I had to rm -rf debian/ in the kernel source dir, make menuconfig
> a
On Friday 27 June 2003 13:57, Joerg Johannes wrote:
> Hello everybody
>
> I (like many others in the last few days) have a problem with kernel
> 2.4.21. I have downloaded the kernel-source-2.4.21 deb, and want to
> apply the acpi patch from acpi.sf.net to it. So here we go:
>
On Sunday 29 June 2003 19:55, Kevin McKinley wrote:
>
> It sounds to me like ACPI is already present in the 2.4.21 kernel.
>
> To test this hypothesis, grep the Changelog for "ACPI" and "acpi".
>
At least I did not get ACPI choices on make menuconfig without patching.
joerg
--
Gib GATES keine
Hello everybody
I (like many others in the last few days) have a problem with kernel
2.4.21. I have downloaded the kernel-source-2.4.21 deb, and want to
apply the acpi patch from acpi.sf.net to it. So here we go:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usr/src/linux$ zcat ../acpi-20030619-2.4.21.diff.gz | patch
On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 05:52:07AM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 10:43:41PM +1000, Rob Weir wrote:
> > How? If you don't use the .config from a kernel-image-foo package
> > already in Debian (in which case you might as well just use the
> > kernel-image-foo package itself) t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Jun 23, 2003 at 10:43:41PM +1000, Rob Weir wrote:
> How? If you don't use the .config from a kernel-image-foo package
> already in Debian (in which case you might as well just use the
> kernel-image-foo package itself) then any pre-compiled mo
On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 11:21:55PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 09:53:10PM +0200, Marino Fernandez wrote:
> > Honestly, is there any advantage on that kernel compared to the one you get
> > from www.kernel.org and compile the clasic way, other than a slight ease of
> > ins
On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 09:53:10PM +0200, Marino Fernandez wrote:
> On Sunday 22 June 2003 11:10 am, Colin Watson wrote:
> > On Sat, Jun 21, 2003 at 11:50:57PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > > Anybody know what the holdup is for 2.4.21 hitting Debian?
>
> Honestly, is there any advantage on that k
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, Jun 22, 2003 at 09:53:10PM +0200, Marino Fernandez wrote:
> Honestly, is there any advantage on that kernel compared to the one you get
> from www.kernel.org and compile the clasic way, other than a slight ease of
> installation.
Yes. You a
tage on that kernel compared to the one you get
} from www.kernel.org and compile the clasic way, other than a slight ease of
} installation.
The main advantage, as far as I'm concerned, is that when a security patch
comes out I see that the kernel-source package has been updated when I do
m
On Sunday 22 June 2003 11:10 am, Colin Watson wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 21, 2003 at 11:50:57PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> > Anybody know what the holdup is for 2.4.21 hitting Debian?
>
Honestly, is there any advantage on that kernel compared to the one you get
from www.kernel.org and compile the clas
On Sat, Jun 21, 2003 at 11:50:57PM -0700, Paul Johnson wrote:
> Anybody know what the holdup is for 2.4.21 hitting Debian?
It's been in the incoming queue waiting for ftpmaster approval for five
days. A week is usually nothing to worry about in that queue.
--
Colin Watson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Anybody know what the holdup is for 2.4.21 hitting Debian?
- --
.''`. Baloo Ursidae <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
: :' :proud Debian admin and user
`. `'`
`- Debian - when you have better things to do than fix a system
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE
Thanks, David! Solved the problem...
Bruno.
On Fri, 2003-06-06 at 11:58, David Z Maze wrote:
> Bruno Diniz de Paula <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I'm writting a program that deals with some kernel structures (defined
> > on the kernel source includes), as well
Bruno Diniz de Paula <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm writting a program that deals with some kernel structures (defined
> on the kernel source includes), as well as with some definitions from
> libc6-dev under asm/... and linux/... The problem is that some of the
> sym
Hi guys,
I'm writting a program that deals with some kernel structures (defined
on the kernel source includes), as well as with some definitions from
libc6-dev under asm/... and linux/... The problem is that some of the
symbols are duplicated and, what is worse, with different definitions.
On Fri, 4 Apr 2003 08:14:25 -0500
stan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The last night, when I ran apt-get dist-upgrade, it updated my kernel
> source package (2.4.20, of it matters). I'm _very_ puzzled, I thought that
> the version number got bumped when a kernel was changed.
W
I'm setting up some new machine, and I used apt-get install to get the
kernel source packages. This is the first time I've done this, rather than
just downloading the tarball.
The last night, when I ran apt-get dist-upgrade, it updated my kernel
source package (2.4.20, of it matters).
On Thu, Mar 06, 2003 at 07:26:55AM -0600, Donald Spoon wrote:
> I have compiled the ALSA modules, and it isn't all that hard IF you know
> a bit about compiling and are comfortable with the process. The
> instructions on the ALSA site are pretty clear. The debs cover all the
You can also get
Kent West wrote:
Donald Spoon wrote:
That said, you can install a perfectly workable version of ALSA using
apt-get on the pre-compiled debs in the Debian package repository.
All you have to do is match the pre-compiled ALSA version with your
kernel. Not all available kernels have matching pre
Donald Spoon wrote:
That said, you can install a perfectly workable version of ALSA using
apt-get on the pre-compiled debs in the Debian package repository.
All you have to do is match the pre-compiled ALSA version with your
kernel. Not all available kernels have matching pre-compiled ALSA
d
e available), I
could do with any help I can get. Thanks.
Kris Kerwin
There is only one "kernel-source" for the 2.4.18 kernels, or for any
kernel tree for that matter. All the variations you see in pre-compiled
binaries are made at compile time via the specific ".config"
On Wed, Mar 05, 2003 at 05:30:47PM -0600, Kris Kerwin wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Something tells me this is a question that has already been asked, and that
> I'll probably be flamed for it, so, flame away! :-) Anyways - could anyone
> tell me where I could find the source for kernel 2.4.18-bf2.4?
ves, as well as kernel.org and on Google. Scary thing -
Google either says it doesn't exist, or (more likely) I don't know where to
begin to look.
maybe here: http://packages.debian.org/stable/devel/kernel-source-2.4.18.html
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject
Hi all,
Something tells me this is a question that has already been asked, and that
I'll probably be flamed for it, so, flame away! :-) Anyways - could anyone
tell me where I could find the source for kernel 2.4.18-bf2.4? I've checked
in Debian's archives, as well as kernel.org and on Google
>>> DT
Thank you very much for all of your assistance. I now have my cheap
little modem (PCTel HSP MicroModem 56, a 'winmodem' not so identified
bought from CompUSA for $25) working just fine under debian linux. It
required a little tailoring to reflect ttyS15, etc
I also surfed a
#include
David Turetsky wrote on Sat Feb 15, 2003 um 11:46:26PM:
>
> >>> David Turetsky wrote on Sat Feb 15, 2003 um 11:54:36AM:
>
>'uname -r' gives '2.4.18-bf2.4' but 'apt-get install
Please fix your mail-quoting, it should include visible quoting levels and not
only one line above a
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 03:55:37AM -0500, David Turetsky wrote:
> Excellent. Thanks. I stopped just short of compiling the new kernel
> (perhaps another day). I needed this to accommodate the installation of
> an 'el cheapo' winmodem driver supported under linux
If you just want to compile a kerne
>>> David Turetsky wrote on Sat Feb 15, 2003 um 11:54:36AM:
'uname -r' gives '2.4.18-bf2.4' but 'apt-get install
kernel-source-2.4.18-bf2.4' replies 'Couldn't find package ...
-bf2.4'
so I installed 2.4.18. The installation we
>>> David Turetsky wrote on Sat Feb 15, 2003 um 11:54:36AM:
'uname -r' gives '2.4.18-bf2.4' but 'apt-get install
kernel-source-2.4.18-bf2.4' replies 'Couldn't find package ...
-bf2.4'
so I installed 2.4.18. The installation we
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 05:33:19PM -0500, David Turetsky wrote:
>ln -sf /boot/vmlinuz-Linux /vmlinuz, which is taken from the line in
>lilo.conf following image=/vmlinuz, and which reads in its
>entirety, 'label=Linux'
>
>Is that what you had in mind, or rather should I have put s
#include
David Turetsky wrote on Sat Feb 15, 2003 um 11:54:36AM:
>
> 'uname -r' gives '2.4.18-bf2.4' but 'apt-get install
>
> kernel-source-2.4.18-bf2.4' replies 'Couldn't find package ... -bf2.4'
>
> so I installed 2.4.18. The
>>> On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 02:12:35PM -0500, David Turetsky wrote:
Following your instructions, I edited lilo.conf and commented out the
4 lines about image=/vmlinuz.old, which appeared with the new
image=/vmlinux entries, then ran lilo. Same problem. Rebooted. Same
problem. Ran ta
* David Turetsky ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030215 08:57]:
>
> * Vineet Kumar asked:
> > Please, can you set your mailer to indent messages to which you
> > reply? This is utter nonsense. It's impossible to make any sense of
> > these threads. If reconfiguring your mailer (or better, switching to
On Sat, Feb 15, 2003 at 02:12:35PM -0500, David Turetsky wrote:
>Following your instructions, I edited lilo.conf and commented out the
>4 lines about image=/vmlinuz.old, which appeared with the new
>image=/vmlinux entries, then ran lilo. Same problem. Rebooted. Same
>problem. Ran ta
;fix
the symlink"
Tnx
>>> Sean came to the rescue with:
the -bf2.4 is just a suffix added to say that the kernel was the one
that came with the bf2.4 installer (bf==boot floppies). the
kernel-source you want is kernel-source-2.4.18 (or .19, or .20).
your real problem
heya,
the -bf2.4 is just a suffix added to say that the kernel
was the one that came with the bf2.4 installer (bf==boot floppies).
the kernel-source you want is kernel-source-2.4.18 (or .19, or .20).
your real problem right now is that you still seem to be booting
with your old kernel. check
To accomodate a new modem's support under linux, I have just
tried to
recompile the kernel and them install the modem's software
support.
Previously I had installed a pre-compiled version of Woody
(3.0r1) from
CDs.
'uname -r' gives '2.4.18-bf2.4'
>>> Vineet Kumar asked:
Please, can you set your mailer to indent messages to which you
reply? This is utter nonsense. It's impossible to make any sense of
these threads. If reconfiguring your mailer (or better, switching to
a new mailer) is impossible, I'd suggest that you not inc
* David Turetsky ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [030215 01:14]:
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: David Turetsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2003 1:30 AM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: RE: Where is kernel source?
>
>
>
> -Ori
-Original Message-
From: David Turetsky [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, February 15, 2003 1:30 AM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Where is kernel source?
-Original Message-
From: Duncan Baynes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 9:16 PM
-Original Message-
From: Duncan Baynes [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 9:16 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Where is kernel source?
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 12:03, David Turetsky wrote:
> Iÿm looking for the debian linux kernel sou
On Sat, 2003-02-15 at 12:03, David Turetsky wrote:
> Iÿm looking for the debian linux kernel source
>
>
>
> Apparently itÿs not kept at /usr/src/linux
>
>
>
> --
>
> David
Hi,
I think you'll find the source is in /usr/src it'll be a file
David Turetsky said:
> I'm looking for the debian linux kernel source
> Apparently it's not kept at /usr/src/linux
Nate said:
>apt-cache search kernel-source-`uname -r`
>
>or just apt-cache search kernel-source
>once you find the package you want, apt-get install it,
David Turetsky said:
> I'm looking for the debian linux kernel source
>
>
>
> Apparently it's not kept at /usr/src/linux
apt-cache search kernel-source-`uname -r`
or just apt-cache search kernel-source
once you find the package you want, apt-get install it,
I think th
I’m looking for the debian linux kernel source
Apparently it’s not kept at /usr/src/linux
--
David
On February 11, 2003 07:42 am, Dave Whiteley wrote:
> There is not a stable package for kernel 2.2.20!
Yes, there are several. I checked first on my machine with
apt-cache search kernel-image-2.2.20
then double-checked at http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages by searching
for kernel-image-2.
> source including the testing distribution, and then I do see 2.2.20,
> > however when I look at the stable package lists on debian.org, 2.2.20
> > is missing.
>
> Are we talking about 2.4.20 or 2.2.20? 2.2.20 is, AFAIK, still the
> default kernel on the boot floppies, a
On Thu, Feb 13, 2003 at 08:53:46AM +0100, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include
> * Dave Whiteley [Tue, Feb 11 2003, 12:42:55PM]:
>
> > I am trying to generate a new set of boot disks for an old system (see
> > another thread).
>
> Which Thread? Where? There are dozens of new threads in this ML.
Sorry
#include
* Dave Whiteley [Tue, Feb 11 2003, 12:42:55PM]:
> I am trying to generate a new set of boot disks for an old system (see
> another thread).
Which Thread? Where? There are dozens of new threads in this ML.
> I see that the boot floppies use a kernel 2.2.20.
>
> There is not a stable pa
lists on debian.org, 2.2.20
> is missing.
Are we talking about 2.4.20 or 2.2.20? 2.2.20 is, AFAIK, still the
default kernel on the boot floppies, and is also available as a
kernel-source and kernel-image package in woody. 2.4.20 is not, and
probably never will be available in woody, since it
On Tue, Feb 11, 2003 at 01:34:19PM +, Keith O'Connell wrote:
>
> > I see that the boot floppies use a kernel 2.2.20.
> >
> > There is not a stable package for kernel 2.2.20!
>
> ?
>
> Yes there is! There is no 2.4.20 though.
Are you sure! It is a bit tricky for me to know, as
> I see that the boot floppies use a kernel 2.2.20.
>
> There is not a stable package for kernel 2.2.20!
?
Yes there is! There is no 2.4.20 though.
When are we likely to see 2.4.20?
Keith
___ _
Keith O'Connell. -o)
Is it a bug?
I am trying to generate a new set of boot disks for an old system (see
another thread).
I see that the boot floppies use a kernel 2.2.20.
There is not a stable package for kernel 2.2.20!
Dave
--
Dave Whiteley
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Phone +44 (0)113 343 2059
School of Electronic and E
ctice would be to only use root
> to download/install the kernel-source (via apt-get) and install the kernel
> (via dpkg -i) and do everything else as an ordinary user, via fakeroot.
So, here's what I do:
(1) Acquire a kernel source tarball. (Install
{i2c,lm-sensors,openafs,alsa}-sour
Team:
Up to now, I've been building my kernels as root. In fact, doing everything
as root. Installing the source, compiling, and installing the resultant
kernel.
But this group seems to think that sound practice would be to only use root
to download/install the kernel-source (via apt-get
Hello,
The package kernel-patch-2.5-lsm Suggests kernel-source-2.5 but this package doesn't
exist !
Is there a special sources.list entry to get some kernel-source-2.5.x ??
Thanks a lot
François
msg26857/pgp0.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Haim Ashkenazi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> After you recompile your kernel with encryption support, you might want
> to use this line in '/etc/fstab' instead of using sudo:
> "/home/haim/.crypto /home/haim/crypto ext2
> defaults,exec,noauto,loop,encryption=AES128,user,exec 0 0"
> o
Stefan Radomski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> to use filesystem encryption via the loopback-device, you need the
> cryptoapi and the patch for the loopback device (eg. loop-jari).
>
> You get 'ioctl: LOOP_SET_STATUS: Invalid argument' because the loop
> device loaded in the kernel is not patched,
On Thu, 2002-12-26 at 05:26, Jack O'Quin wrote:
>
> sudo losetup -e blowfish /dev/loop0 ~/.crypto
> Available keysizes (bits): 128 160 192 256
> Keysize: 256
> Password :x
>
> Password :x
>
> The cipher does not exist, or a cipher module needs to be load
On Thu, 2002-12-26 at 04:26, Jack O'Quin wrote:
>
> I managed to install cryptoapi-core-source from testing and build
> a 2.4.19 kernel with those modules (plus ALSA).
>
> But losetup still fails:
>
> sudo losetup -e blowfish /dev/loop0 ~/.crypto
> Available keysizes (bits): 128 160 192 25
I've RTFM'ed and googled all over the place, but still can't build
kernel-source-2.4.19 under Debian Woody with support for loopback file
system encryption. A lot of what's on the web seems to be out of
date, making it difficult to figure out what's going on.
I managed
Hello,
On Wed, 4 Dec 2002, Adam Warner wrote:
> Since no working fix has been provided to the Linux Kernel mailing
> list
> that is very doubtful (did you check the /usr/share/doc/...
> directory?):
> http://www.uwsg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0212.0/0012.html
Right, I have just read A. Morton'
Hi Marcin Fusinski,
> Greetings!
>
> Is Debian package kernel-source-2.4.20 affected by the (limited) ext3
> data corruption bug or had it been fixed/patched (optimisation of
> data-ordered inodes only) before the package was released?
Since no working fix has been provided to t
Greetings!
Is Debian package kernel-source-2.4.20 affected by the (limited) ext3
data corruption bug or had it been fixed/patched (optimisation of
data-ordered inodes only) before the package was released?
Thanks.
--
=== Marcin Fusinski - [EMAIL PROTECTED] ===
+ Glogow MASTERnet SETI User
Eduard, so far, no feedback from me on the speed of "fgl_glxgears"
yet ;-)
H :-)
Far duller than a serpent's tooth it is to spend a quiet youth.
Eduard Bloch wrote:
#include
* Nikita V. Youshchenko [Fri, Nov 22 2002, 11:15:24AM]:
kernel includes at /usr/src/linux/include n
:15:24AM]:
kernel includes at /usr/src/linux/include not found or incomplete
file: /usr/src/linux/include/linux/version.h
haralambos:/lib/modules/fglrx/build_mod#
The mentioned file is auto-generated on kernel build.
So it is not in kernel-source-*
But kernel-headers-* do contain it.
Maybe
auto-generated on kernel build.
> So it is not in kernel-source-*
> But kernel-headers-* do contain it.
>
> Maybe you need to install kernel-headers-xxx and point ATI's script to
> /usr/src/kernel-headers/xxx ...
Yes. Many people set a symlink from
/usr/src/kernel-headers-- to /
not found or incomplete
> file: /usr/src/linux/include/linux/version.h
> haralambos:/lib/modules/fglrx/build_mod#
>
The mentioned file is auto-generated on kernel build.
So it is not in kernel-source-*
But kernel-headers-* do contain it.
Maybe you need to install kernel-headers-xxx and
inux/version.h
haralambos:/lib/modules/fglrx/build_mod#
But I have installed "kernel-source-2.4.18.tar.bz" & I am running
2.4.18-bf2.4.
Um, where do I find the full source?
The control panel installed, partly
*BFN*
H :-)
I don't know half of you half as well as I
r
using a stock packaged kernel). One way is to grab the kernel-source
package for the kernel you are running and copy your
/boot/config- to the top level of the source tree and then
configure it: either via "make oldconfig" followed by "make dep", or
through the use of make-kp
Jamin W.Collins wrote:
> Did you configure the kernel sources, and run at minimum a "make dep" in
> the kernel source directory?
>
Nope, i'm too green. I guess I'm in such a hurry to get the modem working
so i can find documentation online that I'm missing th
On Thu, 24 Oct 2002 22:01:05 +0100 "jerry k"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> it's expecting
> to find the kernel source tree at /usr/src/linux. That's fine, i've got
> a symlink there to /usr/src/kernel-source-2.2.20
Did you configure the kernel sources
Apologies for the long post.
I'm attempting to install HCF modem drivers from a tarball --I know, I'll
get a real modem, that's not my point just now-- and it's expecting to find
the kernel source tree at /usr/src/linux. That's fine, i've got a symlink
there to /us
Vineet Kumar said:
> * Russell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [020831 20:30]:
>> Do you use midnight commander? You can read compressed .gz
>> text files without having to first unzip them.
>
> less can do this as well from the commandline, given that the
> environment is properly primed with "eval $(lesspip
* Russell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) [020831 20:30]:
> Do you use midnight commander? You can read compressed .gz
> text files without having to first unzip them.
less can do this as well from the commandline, given that the
environment is properly primed with "eval $(lesspipe)". It can view
many diffe
d that works:
>
> 1. download source from mirror and extract it in
> /usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.18
2.4.18 and 2.4.19 appear to be very different beasts. I've had no problem
compiling my own versions of 2.4.18. I recently tried
kernel-source-2.4.19 with a config from a 2.4.18 Debian
tock 2.4.18 debian
> kernel uses it.
This is what i did that works:
1. download source from mirror and extract it in /usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.18
2. copy the config-2.4.18-686 from boot and give it name .config so that
i only use the new options in new kernel.
#/usr/src/kernel-source-2.
nd me).
>>
>>
>
>Don't worry that it takes a while to learn. The biggest battle
>is finding the useful places for information, which you can
>get here.
>
>This shows the 'conventional' way of kernel building:
> http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Kernel-HO
ile 2.4.18 as I have it or would that give me what I already have
>again? I'm a little frustrated from weeks of just trying to get Debian functional.
That's because you installed the kernel-source binary package which is
only meant to be used to build *Debian* kernel images. To
On Sat, 2002-08-31 at 22:39, Chris A. Morgan wrote:
> Hi List
>
> I'm struggling through the sea of documentation as a linux and Debian newbie. Got
>Debian 3.0 installed (2.4.18-bf.2) on my Thinkpad 770 with only a few minor
>annoyances like no sound and some other strange functionalities.
>
to learn. The biggest battle
is finding the useful places for information, which you can
get here.
This shows the 'conventional' way of kernel building:
http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Kernel-HOWTO.html
The debian way is to turn the kernel source into a .deb
package using kpkg-make:
/usr/
Hi List
I'm struggling through the sea of documentation as a linux and Debian newbie. Got
Debian 3.0 installed (2.4.18-bf.2) on my Thinkpad 770 with only a few minor annoyances
like no sound and some other strange functionalities.
I want to upgrade to 2.4.19 kernel and compile it myself to pe
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> On Sat, Aug 31, 2002 at 03:40:22AM -0600, Bob Proulx wrote:
> > Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-31 19:02:36 +1000]:
>
> > > Do i need /usr/include/linux and /usr/include/asm ?
> >
> > Yes. Some source code will reference it. But most importantly libc
> > will
place?
> > (i think on other systems these are provided in the kernel source
> > directly)
>
> That has been the traditional linux method. But it does not have to
> be that way. And that way has problems. /usr/src is a source
> development area. /usr/include is an ar
d be the header files from the kernel
> source tree so you really have to remove these directories and
> link /usr/include/linux and /usr/include/asm to the kernel
> source directory. Please follow the steps below.
That is absolutely terrible advice. It's a very good way to break a
De
Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-08-31 19:02:36 +1000]:
> In my debian 3 system, i've got no /usr/src/linux directory
> or symlink. In what situations do i need the kernel source
> here?
None unless you _want_ to put things there.
> Do the 'generic' kernel co
Hi,
In my debian 3 system, i've got no /usr/src/linux directory
or symlink. In what situations do i need the kernel source
here?
Do the 'generic' kernel compiling/installation instructions such
as at http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/Kernel-HOWTO.html apply ok to
a debian system?
gt; In file included from /usr/include/linux/sched.h:13,
> > from 3c90x.h:36,
> > from 3c90x.c:1:
> >
> > so I remembered I need to install the kernel source.
> > I've installed it (and made sure it's at /usr/src/linux
401 - 500 of 742 matches
Mail list logo
