On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Simon Huggins wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 01:41:45AM -0500, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> > > > This is similar to my patch-names patch, which lets you add components
> > > > to uname too. IIRC, it was rejected because it made things easier.
> > > Erm? Not really. Not
On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 01:41:45AM -0500, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> > > This is similar to my patch-names patch, which lets you add components
> > > to uname too. IIRC, it was rejected because it made things easier.
> > Erm? Not really. Not unless you want
> >
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Simon Huggins wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 11:59:41AM -0500, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> > This is similar to my patch-names patch, which lets you add components
> > to uname too. IIRC, it was rejected because it made things easier.
>
> Erm? Not really. Not unless you
On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 11:59:41AM -0500, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> This is similar to my patch-names patch, which lets you add components
> to uname too. IIRC, it was rejected because it made things easier.
Erm? Not really. Not unless you want
On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:18:51PM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> Simon Huggins wrote:
[about modutils and complaints that people don't read
Documentation/Changes]
> > Why not make it easy on people and have a log something like:
> > 2.4.0-testX-preY
> > Requires modutils-x.y.z otherwise
On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 01:41:45AM -0500, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
This is similar to my patch-names patch, which lets you add components
to uname too. IIRC, it was rejected because it made things easier.
Erm? Not really. Not unless you want
On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Simon Huggins wrote:
On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 01:41:45AM -0500, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
This is similar to my patch-names patch, which lets you add components
to uname too. IIRC, it was rejected because it made things easier.
Erm? Not really. Not unless you want
On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> Simon Huggins wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 08:46:56AM +1100, Keith Owens wrote:
> > ... and a few more times recent weeks ...
> >
> > >
> > > Why don't you look in linux/Documentation/Changes? That file exist
> > > precisely to stop repeated
Simon Huggins wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 08:46:56AM +1100, Keith Owens wrote:
> ... and a few more times recent weeks ...
>
> >
> > Why don't you look in linux/Documentation/Changes? That file exist
> > precisely to stop repeated questions like this on the linux kernel
> > developers
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 08:46:56AM +1100, Keith Owens wrote:
... and a few more times recent weeks ...
>
> Why don't you look in linux/Documentation/Changes? That file exist
> precisely to stop repeated questions like this on the linux kernel
> developers list.
>
Because the file just lists
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 08:46:56AM +1100, Keith Owens wrote:
... and a few more times recent weeks ...
rant
Why don't you look in linux/Documentation/Changes? That file exist
precisely to stop repeated questions like this on the linux kernel
developers list.
/rant
Because the file just
On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Daniel Phillips wrote:
Simon Huggins wrote:
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 08:46:56AM +1100, Keith Owens wrote:
... and a few more times recent weeks ...
rant
Why don't you look in linux/Documentation/Changes? That file exist
precisely to stop repeated questions
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 18:07:13 -0400 (EDT),
"Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ahaa! Aye... Does this imply that there will, in the future, be
>other than '/kernel/drivers' as modules? Or is this (I fear) another
>change that; "Doesn't have to be better, only different..."
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Keith Owens wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 15:09:02 -0400 (EDT),
> Andrew Park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Just installed linux-2.4.0-test7, but I noticed that the modules get
> >installed
> >
> > /lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/drivers/...
> >
> >which is different from
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 15:09:02 -0400 (EDT),
Andrew Park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Just installed linux-2.4.0-test7, but I noticed that the modules get
>installed
>
> /lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/drivers/...
>
>which is different from previous kernels. Do I need to modify modules
>path in
Just make sure you have the latest modutils.
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 03:09:02PM -0400, Andrew Park wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just installed linux-2.4.0-test7, but I noticed that the modules get
> installed
>
> /lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/drivers/...
>
> which is different from previous
Hi,
Just installed linux-2.4.0-test7, but I noticed that the modules get
installed
/lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/drivers/...
which is different from previous kernels. Do I need to modify modules
path in conf.modules in order that the modules can be found during
boot? or is there an
Hi,
Just installed linux-2.4.0-test7, but I noticed that the modules get
installed
/lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/drivers/...
which is different from previous kernels. Do I need to modify modules
path in conf.modules in order that the modules can be found during
boot? or is there an
Just make sure you have the latest modutils.
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 03:09:02PM -0400, Andrew Park wrote:
Hi,
Just installed linux-2.4.0-test7, but I noticed that the modules get
installed
/lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/drivers/...
which is different from previous kernels. Do I
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Keith Owens wrote:
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 15:09:02 -0400 (EDT),
Andrew Park [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just installed linux-2.4.0-test7, but I noticed that the modules get
installed
/lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/drivers/...
which is different from previous kernels.
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 18:07:13 -0400 (EDT),
"Richard B. Johnson" [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ahaa! Aye... Does this imply that there will, in the future, be
other than '/kernel/drivers' as modules? Or is this (I fear) another
change that; "Doesn't have to be better, only different..."
21 matches
Mail list logo
