On Tue, 12 Sep 2000, Simon Huggins wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 01:41:45AM -0500, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> > > > This is similar to my patch-names patch, which lets you add components
> > > > to uname too. IIRC, it was rejected because it made things easier.
> > > Erm? Not really. Not unless
On Tue, Sep 12, 2000 at 01:41:45AM -0500, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> > > This is similar to my patch-names patch, which lets you add components
> > > to uname too. IIRC, it was rejected because it made things easier.
> > Erm? Not really. Not unless you want
> > 2.2.x-requires-modutils-2.3.9-req
On Mon, 11 Sep 2000, Simon Huggins wrote:
> On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 11:59:41AM -0500, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> > This is similar to my patch-names patch, which lets you add components
> > to uname too. IIRC, it was rejected because it made things easier.
>
> Erm? Not really. Not unless you want
On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 11:59:41AM -0500, Oliver Xymoron wrote:
> This is similar to my patch-names patch, which lets you add components
> to uname too. IIRC, it was rejected because it made things easier.
Erm? Not really. Not unless you want
2.2.x-requires-modutils-2.3.9-requires-pppd-x.y.
On Sat, Sep 09, 2000 at 05:18:51PM +0200, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> Simon Huggins wrote:
[about modutils and complaints that people don't read
Documentation/Changes]
> > Why not make it easy on people and have a log something like:
> > 2.4.0-testX-preY
> > Requires modutils-x.y.z otherwise
On Sat, 9 Sep 2000, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> Simon Huggins wrote:
> > On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 08:46:56AM +1100, Keith Owens wrote:
> > ... and a few more times recent weeks ...
> >
> > >
> > > Why don't you look in linux/Documentation/Changes? That file exist
> > > precisely to stop repeated q
Simon Huggins wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 08:46:56AM +1100, Keith Owens wrote:
> ... and a few more times recent weeks ...
>
> >
> > Why don't you look in linux/Documentation/Changes? That file exist
> > precisely to stop repeated questions like this on the linux kernel
> > developers list
On Thu, Sep 07, 2000 at 08:46:56AM +1100, Keith Owens wrote:
... and a few more times recent weeks ...
>
> Why don't you look in linux/Documentation/Changes? That file exist
> precisely to stop repeated questions like this on the linux kernel
> developers list.
>
Because the file just lists v
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 18:07:13 -0400 (EDT),
"Richard B. Johnson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Ahaa! Aye... Does this imply that there will, in the future, be
>other than '/kernel/drivers' as modules? Or is this (I fear) another
>change that; "Doesn't have to be better, only different..."
/lib/modu
On Thu, 7 Sep 2000, Keith Owens wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 15:09:02 -0400 (EDT),
> Andrew Park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Just installed linux-2.4.0-test7, but I noticed that the modules get
> >installed
> >
> > /lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/drivers/...
> >
> >which is different from pr
On Wed, 6 Sep 2000 15:09:02 -0400 (EDT),
Andrew Park <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Just installed linux-2.4.0-test7, but I noticed that the modules get
>installed
>
> /lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/drivers/...
>
>which is different from previous kernels. Do I need to modify modules
>path in
Just make sure you have the latest modutils.
On Wed, Sep 06, 2000 at 03:09:02PM -0400, Andrew Park wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just installed linux-2.4.0-test7, but I noticed that the modules get
> installed
>
> /lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/drivers/...
>
> which is different from previous kernels
Hi,
Just installed linux-2.4.0-test7, but I noticed that the modules get
installed
/lib/modules/`uname -r`/kernel/drivers/...
which is different from previous kernels. Do I need to modify modules
path in conf.modules in order that the modules can be found during
boot? or is there an u
13 matches
Mail list logo
