Re: linux-sources

2012-02-11 Thread Panayiotis Karabassis
On 02/11/2012 02:14 PM, lina wrote: > On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Scott Ferguson > wrote: >> On 11/02/12 22:53, lina wrote: >>> Right now updating I notice the install of linux-source 3.2 >>> >>> my question is that: >>> >>> 1] will it install on / >>> my / has reached 83% >> >> Maybe, depend

Re: linux-sources

2012-02-11 Thread lina
On Sat, Feb 11, 2012 at 8:02 PM, Scott Ferguson wrote: > On 11/02/12 22:53, lina wrote: >> Right now updating I notice the install of linux-source 3.2 >> >> my question is that: >> >> 1] will it install on / >> my / has reached 83% > > Maybe, depends on your partitioning. > If you have only the on

Re: linux-sources

2012-02-11 Thread Scott Ferguson
On 11/02/12 22:53, lina wrote: > Right now updating I notice the install of linux-source 3.2 > > my question is that: > > 1] will it install on / > my / has reached 83% Maybe, depends on your partitioning. If you have only the one partition - yes. (mount will tell you) 7% of free space "could"

Re: Linux Sources

2001-07-28 Thread Joost Kooij
On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 04:25:55PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I downloaded a copy of the Linux 2.4.7 sources as a tar-gz file, and I > suppose I need to install them into /usr/src. However, the tar-gz's contents > are not at all indicative of that, and doing a make config just gives me a

Re: Linux Sources

2001-07-28 Thread Karsten M. Self
on Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 10:44:56PM +0200, J.H.M. Dassen (Ray) ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: > On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 16:25:55 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > I downloaded a copy of the Linux 2.4.7 sources as a tar-gz file, and I > > suppose I need to install them into /usr/src. However, the tar

Re: Linux Sources

2001-07-28 Thread J.H.M. Dassen \(Ray\)
On Sat, Jul 28, 2001 at 16:25:55 -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > I downloaded a copy of the Linux 2.4.7 sources as a tar-gz file, and I > suppose I need to install them into /usr/src. However, the tar-gz's contents > are not at all indicative of that, and doing a make config just gives me a >