Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-02-02 Thread Mo McKinlay
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Wednesday, Richard B. Johnson ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > Now just a cotton-picken minute. When was the last time you > accessed that site? I spent most of last night looking through > EMPTY directories with files that are invisible to ftp

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-02-01 Thread Matt Kemner
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: root> See attached. "Just because you can see the candy doesn't mean root> they'll let you have any" Richard, I just cut & pasted this from your attachment: "Please note that the directory structure on ftp.gnu.org was redisorganzied fairly

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread mirabilos
Did you a make clean/mrproper before? I usually do, and the kernel runs fine. -mirabilos -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.12+(proprietary extensions) # Updated:20010129 nick=mirabilos GO/S d@ s--: a--- C++ UL P--- L++$(-^lang) E(joe) W+(++) loc=.de N? o K? w-(+$) O+>+++ M-- V-

[OT] Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Doug McNaught
"Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Sean Hunter wrote: > > Okay! I'm answering the guy who gave me the kindest response. > The rest of you guys can just hold your belly. > > Right. I'm getting blind. Been typing the same error > every time I tried the site.

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread James Sutherland
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: > > On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > > On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > > On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > > > > > > > > The subject says it all. `make dep`

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Doug McNaught
"Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > See attached. "Just because you can see the candy doesn't mean > they'll let you have any" [output of README when you connect:] > Please note that the directory structure on ftp.gnu.org was redisorganzied > fairly recently, such that

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Richard B. Johnson
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Sean Hunter wrote: Okay! I'm answering the guy who gave me the kindest response. The rest of you guys can just hold your belly. Right. I'm getting blind. Been typing the same error every time I tried the site. Cheers, Dick Johnson Penguin : Linux version 2.4.1 on an i686

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Mike Dresser
> ftp> ls mak* > > make: > > -rw-r--r-- 1 ftp ftp 1030393 Jun 24 2000 make-3.79.1.tar.gz > > ftp> get make-3.79.1.tar.gz > get make/make-3.79.1.tar.gz You missed the make: it did just before it listed the contents of make/ Just tried it myself with make/make-3.79.1.tar.gz,

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Rik van Riel
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, David Woodhouse wrote: > [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > > ftp> cd gnu > > ftp> ls > > ftp> ls mak* > > ftp> bin > > ftp> get make-3.79.1.tar.gz > > ftp> get make-3.79.1.tar.gz > > ftp> exit > > Try typing 'pwd' instead of 'exit' at the end of this script. He must have "spent

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread David Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: > ftp> cd gnu > ftp> ls > ftp> ls mak* > ftp> bin > ftp> get make-3.79.1.tar.gz > ftp> get make-3.79.1.tar.gz > ftp> exit Try typing 'pwd' instead of 'exit' at the end of this script. dwmw2 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread anders . karlsson
Just a thought, how about 'cd make' before you do the get? /Anders - 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: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Rik van Riel
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > See attached. "Just because you can see the candy doesn't mean > they'll let you have any" Thanks for confirming (once again) your status as a person-who-can't-even-bother-to-figure-out-how-ls-works Rik -- Virtual memory is like a game you

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Richard B. Johnson
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > > > > I cannot find the source for GNU Make 3.77+ > > > > > > I have a hard time believing that you

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Rik van Riel
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: > > On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > > I cannot find the source for GNU Make 3.77+ > > > > I have a hard time believing that you don't have > > the skills to go to ftp.gnu.org and

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Richard B. Johnson
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Michael B. Trausch wrote: > On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > > > I cannot find the source for GNU Make 3.77+ Does anybody know were > > it is now? Also, for a long time, I have been trying to find > > the source for bison "yacc". > > > > I'd wonder if

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Richard B. Johnson
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: > > > On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > > > > > > The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. > > > > > > It worked fine here, with

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Michael B. Trausch
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > I cannot find the source for GNU Make 3.77+ Does anybody know were > it is now? Also, for a long time, I have been trying to find > the source for bison "yacc". > I'd wonder if you actually know where the Free Software Foundation's servers

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Rik van Riel
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: > > On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > > > > The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. > > > > It worked fine here, with 2.4.1 unpacked from the tarball. > > I cannot find the

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Richard B. Johnson
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: > On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > > > The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. > > It worked fine here, with 2.4.1 unpacked from the tarball. > > Rik > -- I cannot find the source for GNU Make 3.77+ Does anybody know were it

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Richard B. Johnson
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. It worked fine here, with 2.4.1 unpacked from the tarball. Rik -- I cannot find the source for GNU Make 3.77+ Does anybody know were it is now?

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Rik van Riel
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. It worked fine here, with 2.4.1 unpacked from the tarball. I cannot find the source for GNU

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Michael B. Trausch
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: I cannot find the source for GNU Make 3.77+ Does anybody know were it is now? Also, for a long time, I have been trying to find the source for bison "yacc". I'd wonder if you actually know where the Free Software Foundation's servers lie...

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Richard B. Johnson
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. It worked fine here, with 2.4.1 unpacked from

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Richard B. Johnson
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Michael B. Trausch wrote: On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: I cannot find the source for GNU Make 3.77+ Does anybody know were it is now? Also, for a long time, I have been trying to find the source for bison "yacc". I'd wonder if you actually

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Rik van Riel
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: I cannot find the source for GNU Make 3.77+ I have a hard time believing that you don't have the skills to go to ftp.gnu.org and download the

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Richard B. Johnson
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: I cannot find the source for GNU Make 3.77+ I have a hard time believing that you don't have the

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread Rik van Riel
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: See attached. "Just because you can see the candy doesn't mean they'll let you have any" Thanks for confirming (once again) your status as a person-who-can't-even-bother-to-figure-out-how-ls-works Rik -- Virtual memory is like a game you

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread anders . karlsson
Just a thought, how about 'cd make' before you do the get? /Anders - 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: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread David Woodhouse
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said: ftp cd gnu ftp ls ftp ls mak* ftp bin ftp get make-3.79.1.tar.gz ftp get make-3.79.1.tar.gz ftp exit Try typing 'pwd' instead of 'exit' at the end of this script. dwmw2 - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread James Sutherland
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Rik van Riel wrote: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken.

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-31 Thread mirabilos
Did you a make clean/mrproper before? I usually do, and the kernel runs fine. -mirabilos -BEGIN GEEK CODE BLOCK- Version: 3.12+(proprietary extensions) # Updated:20010129 nick=mirabilos GO/S d@ s--: a--- C++ UL P--- L++$(-^lang) E(joe) W+(++) loc=.de N? o K? w-(+$) O M-- V-

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Peter Samuelson
[Richard B. Johnson] > Bob Tracy found the problem: the second ':' really needs to be > escaped even though newer versions of make allow what was written. > -$(MODINCL)/%.ver: CFLAGS := -I./include $(CFLAGS) > +$(MODINCL)/%.ver: CFLAGS \:= -I./include $(CFLAGS) No, that's a workaround in that

Re: Reiserfs problem was: Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Chris Mason
On Tuesday, January 30, 2001 03:42:36 PM -0800 "Brett G. Person" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Worked fine here but i am getting segfaults on my Reiser filesystems. > I've been distracted by a project over the last few days. Is what I'm > seeing a symptom of the fs corruption people were

Reiserfs problem was: Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Brett G. Person
Worked fine here but i am getting segfaults on my Reiser filesystems. I've been distracted by a project over the last few days. Is what I'm seeing a symptom of the fs corruption people were talking about last week? Brett G. Person 415-358-2656 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Penguin Computing - The World's

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Keith Owens
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:09:48 -0500 (EST), "Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Keith Owens wrote: >> You mean that nobody reads Documentation/Changes any more? > >Seldom, only once or twice a day. Guess that's not often enough >to keep up on the new tool

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Richard B. Johnson
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Keith Owens wrote: > On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 17:57:44 -0500 (EST), > "Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Keith Owens wrote: > > > >> On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:45:16 -0500 (EST), > >> "Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> >The

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Richard B. Johnson
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Keith Owens wrote: > > > On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:45:16 -0500 (EST), > > "Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. > > >make[4]: Entering directory

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Keith Owens
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 17:57:44 -0500 (EST), "Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Keith Owens wrote: > >> On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:45:16 -0500 (EST), >> "Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. >>

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Xuan Baldauf
"Richard B. Johnson" wrote: > On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Keith Owens wrote: > > > On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:45:16 -0500 (EST), > > "Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. > > >make[4]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.1/drivers/acpi'

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Richard B. Johnson
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Keith Owens wrote: > On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:45:16 -0500 (EST), > "Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. > >make[4]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.1/drivers/acpi' > >Makefile:29: *** target pattern

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Keith Owens
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:45:16 -0500 (EST), "Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. >make[4]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.1/drivers/acpi' >Makefile:29: *** target pattern contains no `%'. Stop. Which version of make are you

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Rik van Riel
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: > The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. It worked fine here, with 2.4.1 unpacked from the tarball. Rik -- Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Rik van Riel
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. It worked fine here, with 2.4.1 unpacked from the tarball. Rik -- Virtual memory is like a game you can't win; However, without VM there's truly nothing to lose...

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Keith Owens
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:45:16 -0500 (EST), "Richard B. Johnson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. make[4]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.1/drivers/acpi' Makefile:29: *** target pattern contains no `%'. Stop. Which version of make are you

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Richard B. Johnson
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Keith Owens wrote: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:45:16 -0500 (EST), "Richard B. Johnson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. make[4]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.1/drivers/acpi' Makefile:29: *** target pattern contains no

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Xuan Baldauf
"Richard B. Johnson" wrote: On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Keith Owens wrote: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:45:16 -0500 (EST), "Richard B. Johnson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. make[4]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.1/drivers/acpi'

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Keith Owens
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 17:57:44 -0500 (EST), "Richard B. Johnson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Keith Owens wrote: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:45:16 -0500 (EST), "Richard B. Johnson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. make[4]: Entering

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Richard B. Johnson
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001, Richard B. Johnson wrote: On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Keith Owens wrote: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:45:16 -0500 (EST), "Richard B. Johnson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The subject says it all. `make dep` is now broken. make[4]: Entering directory

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Richard B. Johnson
On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Keith Owens wrote: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 17:57:44 -0500 (EST), "Richard B. Johnson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Keith Owens wrote: On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 16:45:16 -0500 (EST), "Richard B. Johnson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The subject says it all.

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Keith Owens
On Tue, 30 Jan 2001 18:09:48 -0500 (EST), "Richard B. Johnson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 31 Jan 2001, Keith Owens wrote: You mean that nobody reads Documentation/Changes any more? Seldom, only once or twice a day. Guess that's not often enough to keep up on the new tool requirements.

Reiserfs problem was: Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Brett G. Person
Worked fine here but i am getting segfaults on my Reiser filesystems. I've been distracted by a project over the last few days. Is what I'm seeing a symptom of the fs corruption people were talking about last week? Brett G. Person 415-358-2656 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Penguin Computing - The World's

Re: Reiserfs problem was: Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Chris Mason
On Tuesday, January 30, 2001 03:42:36 PM -0800 "Brett G. Person" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Worked fine here but i am getting segfaults on my Reiser filesystems. I've been distracted by a project over the last few days. Is what I'm seeing a symptom of the fs corruption people were talking

Re: Version 2.4.1 cannot be built.

2001-01-30 Thread Peter Samuelson
[Richard B. Johnson] Bob Tracy found the problem: the second ':' really needs to be escaped even though newer versions of make allow what was written. -$(MODINCL)/%.ver: CFLAGS := -I./include $(CFLAGS) +$(MODINCL)/%.ver: CFLAGS \:= -I./include $(CFLAGS) No, that's a workaround in that it