Re: Linux 2.4.3-ac5
* Alan Cox ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) uttered:
>
> ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/alan/2.4/
one of the problems i've been having so far with the 2.4.3 series is the
fact that USB appears to be futzed. It just doesn't want to work right.
Also, I compile a lot of things as modules and I've been getting lots of
unresolved symbols and hence many things (including my nic) don't work,
so I am still stuck at 2.4.2-ac4. So here's some info that should help
out whoevers doing the specific work on USB and whatever else decided it
wanted to say "ok, you suck, go away" ;)
one other note i should mention, is that i use usbmgr from debian linux
(sid) and after i tweaked its config file, it runs just fine,
hot-plugging with my usb mice just fine... gpm and X don't have a
problem with them.
system: abit bp6 dual celerons 366 oc'd to 504 work fine with 2.4.2-ac4
and win98 blahblahblah
utils:
Gnu C 2.95.3
Gnu make 3.79.1
binutils 2.11.90.0.1
util-linux
util-linux Note: /usr/bin/fdformat is obsolete and is no
longer available.
util-linux Please use /usr/bin/superformat instead (make
sure you have the
util-linux fdutils package installed first). Also, there
had been some
util-linux major changes from version 4.x. Please refer to
the documentation.
util-linux
mount 2.11b
modutils 2.4.2
e2fsprogs 1.19
reiserfsprogs 3.x.0j
Linux C Library2.2.2
Dynamic linker (ldd) 2.2.2
Procps 2.0.7
Net-tools 1.59
Console-tools 0.2.3
Sh-utils 2.0.11
blahblahblah...
well that's about it, i've attached some logs that i snipped since the
rest of it didn't contain any errogenous errors. If you need more info
please give me a hollar. But i think this should do it.
the first log is from make modules_install at the end, the second is the
tailing part of dmesg (nothing out of place before it, and it tends to
scroll past the buffer so I can't see the whole thing even with dmesg
-s2, which i find quite annoying, but 'tis life)
.oO Gnea [gnea at rochester dot rr dot com] Oo.
.oO url: http://garson.org/~gnea Oo.
"You can tune a filesystem, but you can't tuna fish." -unknown
make[1]: Nothing to be done for `modules_install'.
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.3-ac5/arch/i386/lib'
cd /lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5; \
mkdir -p pcmcia; \
find kernel -path '*/pcmcia/*' -name '*.o' | xargs -i -r ln -sf ../{} pcmcia
if [ -r System.map ]; then /sbin/depmod -ae -F System.map 2.4.3-ac5; fi
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/char/joystick/pcigame.o
depmod: __io_virt_debug
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/ieee1394/ohci1394.o
depmod: __io_virt_debug
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/ieee1394/pcilynx.o
depmod: __io_virt_debug
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/ieee1394/video1394.o
depmod: __io_virt_debug
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/media/video/bttv.o
depmod: __io_virt_debug
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/message/i2o/i2o_block.o
depmod: __io_virt_debug
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/message/i2o/i2o_core.o
depmod: __io_virt_debug
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/message/i2o/i2o_lan.o
depmod: __io_virt_debug
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/message/i2o/i2o_scsi.o
depmod: __io_virt_debug
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in /lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/net/3c59x.o
depmod: __io_virt_debug
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in /lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/net/ac3200.o
depmod: __io_virt_debug
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/net/arlan-proc.o
depmod: __io_virt_debug
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in /lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/net/arlan.o
depmod: __io_virt_debug
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in /lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/net/eepro100.o
depmod: __io_virt_debug
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in /lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/net/ethertap.o
depmod: netlink_kernel_create
depmod: netlink_broadcast
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/net/irda/irda-usb.o
depmod: rtnl_unlock
depmod: rtnl_lock
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/net/irda/irport.o
depmod: rtnl_unlock
depmod: rtnl_lock
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in
/lib/modules/2.4.3-ac5/kernel/drivers/net/irda/irtty.o
depmod: rtnl_unlock
depmod: rtnl_lock
depmod: *** Unre
Re: ANNOUNCE New Open Source X server
* Miles Lane ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) uttered: > Take a chill pill, dude. i am quite calm. :) > Dave's questions are perfectly valid. Obviously, if a bunch of > kick-butt programmers want to go off a create a "from-scratch" > X11 implementation, please go right ahead! If it turns out to > be great (have rock-solid support for legacy apps, have screaming > fast accellerated graphics drivers for all major hardware, support > anti-aliased fonts, alpha-blending and so on in a way that is > compatible with XFree86 APIs) then, sure, I'll switch over to the > new X Server. Of course, in the seven years that this project > will take, XFree86 will have evolved quite a bit. So you're saying, that unless it _already_ has screaming support from commercial hardware vendors, then everyone should just support one and ONLY one type of X server? There are a lot of other X server projects out there and different people go about developing them in different ways. This whole holier-than-thou attitude about XFree86 that I'm getting from you and David (not the rest of the XFree86 community, I know there are bigots out there, but not everyone's a bigot) in general tends to say to me "hm, these guys really DO have their heads stuck up their anal cavities! amazing! and now they're trying to say that WE'RE wrong in our own ways??" it's quite a riot, and i've enjoyed a good chuckle - but don't get me wrong, i'm not mad at your or David personally, however the attitudes that you appear to employ seem to denote a dull sensitivity level around the area of delusionment of grandeur. While you may sit there and rebute such claims, your rebutement would only be further proof of where I am coming from and thus we understand each other quite perfectly... of course if that is not the case and someone is holding a gun to your head, forcing you to make such claims, then please, feel free to express your true feelings, otherwise, what I have pointed out will be true. > I suppose the new X Server could jettison support for legacy > apps and only support applications written with the latest RAD > toolkits. There might be some value there. This might also > allow the new server to stabilize sooner. the 'latest RAD toolkits' now THERE'S something decent worth quoting, I hope you won't mind me doing so. :) So, going back to the above, and again, let me know if i'm wrong here, you're saying that in order to support a decent X server project, there NEEDS to be 'RAD toolkits', they can't be mediocre, less memory hungry, etc.. they have to be "RAD", which is quite a vague term. Perhaps you could elaborate on this, perferably in private email seeing as how the scope of this topic is really not fit for this mailing list. But SERIOUSLY here folks, please take a good look at yourselves for a second before bothering to take this thread any longer and consider what I have stated here, is it really worth bashing someone who's just trying to help out the community as a whole with new ideas that just don't fit into your paradigm? Obviously anyone that's going out of their way to design a new type of X server from the ground up has to have SOME sort of understanding of various X servers out there, including (but not limited to) Xfree86, actually KNOWS the design structure, KNOWS where it's heading, and has decided that they'd like to do something different, new, from scratch, to go in another direction. I think Linus himself did this back in 1991, obviously not with X, but you get the idea I think. If not, then don't bother answering cuz it'll just be a waste of bandwidth (not to say that this particular email isn't, but once in awhile, it needs to be done. and now it is.) .oO Gnea [gnea at rochester dot rr dot com] Oo. .oO url: http://garson.org/~gnea Oo. "You can tune a filesystem, but you can't tuna fish." -unknown - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: ANNOUNCE New Open Source X server
* Alan Cox ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) uttered: > the ideas behind it. Some of them have been at it since Linus was a small > child. The TinyX server framework also lets you hack arbitarily interesting > card drivers into a nice easy framework. you will NOT see my complaining about any of that. :) btw Alan, I have a problem with sending you email directly, it appears that rr.com made it into ORBS :( ah well, we'll get there, sooner or later.. it is.. inevitable. :) .oO Gnea [gnea at rochester dot rr dot com] Oo. .oO url: http://garson.org/~gnea Oo. "You can tune a filesystem, but you can't tune a fish." -Kirk McKusick - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Re: ANNOUNCE New Open Source X server
* David S. Miller ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) uttered: > > James Simmons writes: > > The Linux GFX project grew out the need for a higher performance X > > And this specific functionality is? > > I think this is not a worthwhile project at all. The X tree, it's > assosciated protocols and APIs, are complicated enough as it is, and > the xfree86 project has some of the most talented and capable people > in this area. It would be a step backwards to do things outside of > xfree86 development. > > If the issue is that "things don't happen fast enough in the xfree86 > tree", why not lend them a hand and submitting patches to them instead > of complaining? You see, it's people like you that actually further along projects such as that.. "oh, it'll never work! blahblahblah!" well gee, X _has_ been around for years... but so's microsoft so we've all gotten into this paradigm that linux is THE end solution for microsoft users... got news for ya bud, Linux is great, it's dope, but quite frankly, if u put all yer eggs in one basket, you become blind to everything else and bill gates likes that. but WAIT! someone ELSE comes along with an open project and what do you do? u take a hateful stance to it... do we see a pattern here? you'd have to be pretty blind not to. .oO Gnea [gnea at rochester dot rr dot com] Oo. .oO url: http://garson.org/~gnea Oo. "If you don't have anything useful to say, eat a fish." -unknown - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
