Instead of trying to patch the kernel, it would be easier (although a
bigger download) to get the version you want and update the config.
The easiest way to do this is to use make oldconfig. First untar the
new kernel. Then, copy .config from the old directory to the new one.
This will keep all yo
On Sun, Jul 23, 2006 at 11:27:00PM -0700, Paul G Rogers wrote:
>
> Over the years I've learned a rule: "Never use version .0 of ANYTHING!"
> I stopped with 2.6.17 just to test. I expect the teeny's fix some late
> glitches. But I want to add some extra packages first.
>
s/glitches/vulnerabili
> Not *all* of the stable patches, they each apply to the _base_
>kernel, not to the previous stable point release. So, you get back
>to 2.6.11 from 2.6.11.12 by reverting patch-2.6.11.12.bz2.
Ah! Thanks for that. I didn't know that. So teeny paches are
cumulative, unlike the incremental minor
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 11:53:59PM -0700, Paul G Rogers wrote:
>
> I guess one approach might be to get all the patch-2.6.11.* files and
> unapply them to get back to 2.6.11, then go forward with 2.6.12, et al.
> But it might be more dependable to bite the bullet and try the 40MB
> download at 40
>> Why mess around with any patches at all? Or am I not getting the>>
drift of your messages?>>If you don't have broadband or don't want to
contribute to stressing the>servers, downloading kernel patches can be an
attractive option. Instead>of dowloading 40MB you only download a few
kB.The best I c
On Fri, Jul 21, 2006 at 08:08:36AM -0700, Paul G Rogers wrote:
> Sorry, thought [2.6.] was understood. IIRC the full name is
> patch-2.6.12-tar.bz2 from kernel.org, of course.
That's the diff between 2.6.11 and 2.6.12 . Not want you want,
surely?
Regards,
Jeremy Henty
--
http://linuxfroms
* Randy McMurchy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-07-21 12:46]:
> Paul G Rogers wrote these words on 07/20/06 21:38 CST:
> > I've just installed 2.6.11.12 with LFS-6.1.1. I want to bring the kernel
> > current. I thought patch-12 would be approproate but it had many rejects
> > and I saw a few "reversed
Paul G Rogers wrote these words on 07/20/06 21:38 CST:
> I've just installed 2.6.11.12 with LFS-6.1.1. I want to bring the kernel
> current. I thought patch-12 would be approproate but it had many rejects
> and I saw a few "reversed or already applied" fly by. What's the
> appropriate path to pa
>I am not sure what you mean by "patch-12". What exactly is that?
Sorry, thought [2.6.] was understood. IIRC the full name is
patch-2.6.12-tar.bz2 from kernel.org, of course.
Paul Rogers ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://www.xprt.net/~pgrogers/
http://www.geocities.com/paulgrogers/
Rogers' Second Law
Paul G Rogers wrote:
I've just installed 2.6.11.12 with LFS-6.1.1. I want to bring the kernel
current. I thought patch-12 would be approproate but it had many rejects
and I saw a few "reversed or already applied" fly by. What's the
appropriate path to patch the kernel?
Paul Rogers ([EMAIL PR
I've just installed 2.6.11.12 with LFS-6.1.1. I want to bring the kernel
current. I thought patch-12 would be approproate but it had many rejects
and I saw a few "reversed or already applied" fly by. What's the
appropriate path to patch the kernel?
Paul Rogers ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://www.xp
11 matches
Mail list logo
