"John H. Robinson, IV" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> we have a 2.2.x kernel for about half the architectures, and a 2.4.x
> kernel for the rest. are we going to have a 2.4.x kernel for all our
> architectures when the woody floppies are released?
Nope, I don't think so. I mean, I'm leaving the
we have a 2.2.x kernel for about half the architectures, and a 2.4.x
kernel for the rest. are we going to have a 2.4.x kernel for all our
architectures when the woody floppies are released?
what's the likelyhood of supporting grabbing the ramdisk over nfs?
(thinking specifically of i386 architect
I just uploaded idepci_2.2.19pre17-2 and compact_2.2.19pre17-2. Changes in both
packages included:
* build with gcc 2.7.2.3 rather than 2.95.2
* generate a kernel-headers package as well
Hopefully we will be able to use these in potato 2.2r3 as well as woody.
-David
Tue, Mar 27, 2001 at
Randolph Chung <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You need to use the same compiler to build the kernel and the pcmcia modules,
> otherwise you'll get mismatched symbols. can you either rebuild the
> kernel with 272 or pcmcia with whatever new compiler you have?
You only need to make sure that you use
In reference to a message from David Whedon, dated Mar 27:
> I noticed that I should have built idepci and compact kernel flavors with
> gcc272. I didn't have it installed on the machine I built them on at the time.
> The pcmcia modules I just built I did use 272, that is why I noticed I had
> m
David Whedon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> new (untested) versions:
...
> pcmcia-modules-2.2.19pre17-compact_3.1.22-0.2potatok1_i386.deb
> pcmcia-modules-2.2.19pre17-ide_3.1.22-0.2potatok1_i386.deb
> pcmcia-modules-2.2.19pre17-idepci_3.1.22-0.2potatok1_i386.deb
> pcmcia-modules-2.2.19pre17_3.1
Brian Mays <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> for. The "CC=gcc272" is necessary because the kernel images have been
> built with v2.7.2 of gcc, and therefore, I need to use the same
> compiler to build compatible modules.
It's only necessary to do the make deps so that the module check sums
are ident
I noticed that I should have built idepci and compact kernel flavors with
gcc272. I didn't have it installed on the machine I built them on at the time.
The pcmcia modules I just built I did use 272, that is why I noticed I had
missed it on the flovors.
David
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EM
David Whedon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> new (untested) versions at:
> http://people.debian.org/~dwhedon/
>
> I'll upload these if I hear soon that it is okay with you, Brian, or you can
> upload them yourself, sort of like sponsoring me, right? It might get in faster
> if someone else uploade
great, thanks for the tip.
new (untested) versions:
pcmcia-cs_3.1.22-0.2potato.diff.gz
pcmcia-cs_3.1.22-0.2potato.dsc
pcmcia-cs_3.1.22-0.2potato_i386.changes
pcmcia-cs_3.1.22-0.2potato_i386.deb
pcmcia-modules-2.2.19pre17-compact_3.1.22-0.2potatok1_i386.deb
pcmcia-modules-2.2.19pre17-ide_3.1.22-
David Whedon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If it is just a question of rebuilding tha packages, I can probably
> help. I haven't gotten the pcmcia-cs buld to make flavors yet.
This is how I get the kernel source prepared for flavours:
(1) Unpack the kernel source tree.
(2) Add a line defining
If it is just a question of rebuilding tha packages, I can probably help. I
haven't gotten the pcmcia-cs buld to make flavors yet.
I needed this patch to get them to build. Unfortunately I expect this will
cause problems with other kernels. Perhaps somehow make this conditional on
kernel versi
David Whedon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I just uploaded
> kernel-image-2.2.19pre17-compact
> kernel-image-2.2.19pre17-idepci
Ok -- I'd be happy to include that in the 2.2r3 update but we will
need the pcmcia-modules packages for those images put into stable.
--
.Adam Di [EMAIL PROTECTE
David Whedon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I suggest you file a bug against kernel-source-2.2.19pre17.
Please don't. Matching kernel-header packages is the responsibility of
the kernel-image builders. Personally, I've started doing them for 2.4,
but at this point I have no plans to do any for 2.
I suggest you file a bug against kernel-source-2.2.19pre17.
David
Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 04:36:03PM -0500 wrote:
> Please make and upload kernel-header-ver.deb along with the new
> kernel-image-ver.deb. The winmodems (don't like them, but almost all
> the new PCs have them) must have drivers com
Please make and upload kernel-header-ver.deb along with the new
kernel-image-ver.deb. The winmodems (don't like them, but almost all
the new PCs have them) must have drivers compiled with kernel-headers.
See for example the Lucent kit I help maintain at:
http://walbran.org/sean/linux/stodolsk/
Marcin Owsiany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 09:14:30AM -0800, David Whedon wrote:
>> I just uploaded
>> kernel-image-2.2.19pre17-compact
>> kernel-image-2.2.19pre17-idepci
> Great. I assume they are i386 only?
Yes.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 2.2 is out! ( http://www.debian.or
On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 09:14:30AM -0800, David Whedon wrote:
> I just uploaded
> kernel-image-2.2.19pre17-compact
> kernel-image-2.2.19pre17-idepci
Great. I assume they are i386 only?
Marcin
--
Marcin Owsiany <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
http://student.uci.agh.edu.pl/~porridge/
GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216
I just uploaded
kernel-image-2.2.19pre17-compact
kernel-image-2.2.19pre17-idepci
-David
Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 12:04:02AM -0700 wrote:
> In reference to a message from David Whedon, dated Mar 17:
> > Are we using compact, idepci and udma66 flavours for i386 for 2.2r3?
> > If so we'll need kernel
In reference to a message from David Whedon, dated Mar 17:
> Are we using compact, idepci and udma66 flavours for i386 for 2.2r3?
> If so we'll need kernel images built from 2.2.19pre17:
>
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot-0103/msg00217.html
>
> I can build them if necessary.
David, go for
Are we using compact, idepci and udma66 flavours for i386 for 2.2r3?
If so we'll need kernel images built from 2.2.19pre17:
http://lists.debian.org/debian-boot-0103/msg00217.html
I can build them if necessary.
-David
Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 12:31:51PM +1100 wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 02:21:
On Sun, Mar 18, 2001 at 02:21:59AM +0100, Marcin Owsiany wrote:
> This might have been asked before, but I couldn't find an
> answer in my mbox:
>
> Which one shall we use - 2.2.x or 2.4.x?
For the boot floppies, 2.2.x.
> In either case: I can't see any -compact and -idepci flavors
> for any k
This might have been asked before, but I couldn't find an
answer in my mbox:
Which one shall we use - 2.2.x or 2.4.x?
In either case: I can't see any -compact and -idepci flavors
for any kernel >= 2.2.18. Will they be made at some point or
won't we use flavors any more?
regards
Marcin
--
Mar
23 matches
Mail list logo
