-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
> Not having tried to compile any recent Linus kernel on powerpc or > elsewhere, I might be wrong, but from my experience it's always been the > case that different architectures each had their own development trees and > their own (rather small) development communities. It's always been up to > you to figure out where to get cutting edge kernel sources, and to deal > with problems yourself as they show up. Advice like 'better stick with > 2.4.21-benh' might just mean that - unless you want to spend your time > fixing patch rejects or compile errors and risk kernel crashes, just use > the stable powerpc branch (which happens to be maintained by Ben). Since I'm not a hacker, I'm willing to compile and test for PowerPC, mainly because I want a working 2.6.0 kernel when it comes out. Maybe that's wishful thinking, but I'll do what I can to make it happen. If that means complaining a bit, I can do that! :-) > Otherwise, join the exclusive community of kernel developers (they keep > secret resources such as the linux-kernel and linuxppc-dev mailing lists) > and join in to the fun. I call it exclusive because there seems to be a members-only-club mentality about accepting complaints about simple things like, "It won't compile" etc....I'm happy to be wrong about this. > If you're > not skilled in kernel hacking, why bother with 2.5 or 2.6? First...I was inspired to start working with this kernel by an article in Linux Journal in March, 2003 (http://www.linuxjournal.com/article.php?sid=6740). So... > Another secret piece of information: Linus' tree has always been pretty > useless on the less popular architectures. Use Alan Cox' branch as a > starting point if there's no proper powerpc devel tree (which I doubt). Yeah, but I'm all about vanilla! Ice cream, kernels... > Not sure what the toolchain stuff is about, do you have any details on > that? Yes...well, this is only based on what I've been told...but Module-Init-Tools is something that the new kernel requires, but woody doesn't have this piece of software...I've also personally got a funny problem since I've got the appropriate version of binutils, but the kernel compiler doesn't think so; it tells me I've got the wrong version. That's what prompted all of this. Thanks for the insight... Russell > Michael - -- Linux -- the OS for the Renaissance Man -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE/HB7/AqKGrvVshJQRAmZtAKCqnhDYYDqfTA18GrxbR7eicpoBiwCgtMUj StMMO2UgxM2MCFxLCwplTcw= =h81O -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
