janjansenbe wrote:
> Can you explain how update-alternatives works in practice ?
Here is an old discussion of it.
http://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2002/08/msg02808.html
But update-alternatives is not appropriate here for managing the
/usr/bin/gcc symlink because currently that is part of th
"janjansenbe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Can you explain how update-alternatives works in practice ?
The manual page update-alternatives(8) does a pretty good job, but the
short and curly of it is: update-alternatives maintains a bunch of
symlinks for things like gcc, vi, and other applicatio
Daniel,
Can you explain how update-alternatives works in practice ?
Jan
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"janjansenbe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> It's the easiest to stick with the kernel versions available in the
> Debian repository you are currently running, for example Debian
> 'testing'.
>
> Just remove the gcc link towards gcc-4.0 and create a new symbolic link
> towards gcc-3.3, the one used
It's the easiest to stick with the kernel versions available in the
Debian repository you are currently running, for example Debian
'testing'.
Just remove the gcc link towards gcc-4.0 and create a new symbolic link
towards gcc-3.3, the one used to compile the kernel 2.6.11 provided
currently in te
"Gorjanc Gregor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>"Gorjanc Gregor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>>
>>> I just bought IBM ThinkPad R50e and I successfully installed Debian
>>> testing on it. Works nice. Is there anyone who is willing to share
>>> kernel (2.6) and any modules configuration optimized fo
>On Saturday 20 August 2005 18:41, Gorjanc Gregor wrote:
>> Hmm, I installed Debian via debian-installer directly as testing. So I
>> assume GCC 4 came as default. Since everything will move to GCC 4
>> sooner or later, should not I rather compile the kernel with GCC 4 than
>> modules with GCC 3.*?
On Saturday 20 August 2005 18:41, Gorjanc Gregor wrote:
> Hmm, I installed Debian via debian-installer directly as testing. So I
> assume GCC 4 came as default. Since everything will move to GCC 4
> sooner or later, should not I rather compile the kernel with GCC 4 than
> modules with GCC 3.*? The
>> [...]
>> You all made fair statements and I am convinced to stay with Debians
>> kernel. I just installed 2.6.11-1-686 image but now I have other
>> problem. I installed sources for ipw2200 and thinkpad modules and
>> tried to install them via 'module-assistant' and for ipw2200 it went
>> fine.
Also sprach "Gorjanc Gregor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> (Sat, 20
Aug 2005 17:57:28 +0200):
> [...]
> You all made fair statements and I am convinced to stay with Debians
> kernel. I just installed 2.6.11-1-686 image but now I have other
> problem. I installed sources for ipw2200 and thinkpad modules and
>
>>"Gorjanc Gregor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>>
>> I just bought IBM ThinkPad R50e and I successfully installed Debian
>> testing on it. Works nice. Is there anyone who is willing to share
>> kernel (2.6) and any modules configuration optimized for this brand?
>> I really get lost in 'make menu
11 matches
Mail list logo
