Andrew writes:
> I might have this on my Slink CD. What other packages will need to be
> downgraded also?
None. You can also use update-alternatives to make cc point to gcc272 if
you want.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
On Fri, 11 Feb 2000, Ethan Benson wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 11, 2000 at 02:37:42PM -0700, Rick Macdonald wrote:
> >
> > http://kernelnotes.org/kpatch22.html
>
> bah, kernelnotes is inherently outdated...
> that was 2.2.13, check the 2.2.14 Errata page (which kernelnotes still
> has not bothered to p
On 12-Feb-2000 John Hasler wrote:
> Ron writes:
>> I know it is possible to have multiple gcc's running on you system, but I
>> don't know how you can do it..
>
> Install gcc272.
I might have this on my Slink CD. What other packages will need to be
downgraded also?
thanks
--
Andrew
On 12-Feb-2000 Ron Rademaker wrote:
> That is definately possible, I know it is possible to have multiple gcc's
> running on you system, but I don't know how you can do it... try HOWTO's
> and manpages, that should let you know how.
I don't want multiple gcc versions, I just want to downgrade to
Ron writes:
> I know it is possible to have multiple gcc's running on you system, but I
> don't know how you can do it..
Install gcc272.
--
John Hasler
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Dancing Horse Hill
Elmwood, Wisconsin
That is definately possible, I know it is possible to have multiple gcc's
running on you system, but I don't know how you can do it... try HOWTO's
and manpages, that should let you know how.
Ron
==
Linux meets Southpark:
-
Would it be possible to go back to an older gcc without breaking my system?
I have a slink CD so I probably have something older if it would work.
tnx
--
Andrew
> Compilers
> This code is intended to build with gcc 2.7.2 and egcs
> 1.1.2. Patches for building with gcc 2.95 are merged but less t
On Fri, Feb 11, 2000 at 02:37:42PM -0700, Rick Macdonald wrote:
>
> http://kernelnotes.org/kpatch22.html
bah, kernelnotes is inherently outdated...
> Linux 2.2.13 Release Notes
>
> Errata
>
> Compilers
> This code is intended to build with gcc 2.7.2 and egcs 1.1.2. It is
> k
Recently folks here pointed out to me that it was known that gcc 2.95 is
not to be used for 2.2.x kernels.
Others said that it was OK with 2.2 kernels but not 2.0 kernels.
Looking at various kernel and gcc deb packages in potato, I saw hints of
the latter statement, but it didn't seem
Subject: Samba with 2.2.x kernels
Date: Fri, Aug 27, 1999 at 10:43:40AM +0200
In reply to:Peter Weiss
Quoting Peter Weiss([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> Hello,
>
> trying to mount a samba volume on my debian box fails with
>
> smbmount-2.1.x //Vincent/us
Hi,
I have a P90 (with 20M of memory*) which is the server for our home
network. It has Debian 2.1r2 installed onto it.
When I try and use the 2.2.x series kernels on the machine and FTP after
downloading about 20-30K it just stops. I have tried .1,.5,.7 and .9
and they all have the same proble
> On 27 Aug 1999 10:43:40 +0200, Peter Weiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
Peter> Hello,
Peter> trying to mount a samba volume on my debian box fails with
Peter> [...]
Peter> The Access denied message sounds a bit strange cause the volume can
be
Peter> mounted on a 2.0.33 kernel bas
Hello,
trying to mount a samba volume on my debian box fails with
smbmount-2.1.x //Vincent/user /mnt -U pewe
load_client_codepage: filename /etc/codepages/codepage.850 does not exist.
Added interface ip=193.96.166.51 bcast=193.96.166.255 nmask=255.255.255.0
Server time
Sorry to reply to my own posting, but all I've had in response
is one private email concurring that a working ppp under 2.0.x
doesn't work under 2.2.x.
Having played about with arp under 2.2.10, the problem seems to
boil down to this:
# arp -i eth0 -d 888.888.92.28
# arp -i eth0 -s 888.888.92.28
I've done what I suspect many have, which is to build a 2.2.x kernel
on top of slink, making the minimal changes outlined below. I have no
problems except with the one machine at work that is connected to the
ethernet and has a modem. If this machine runs 2.0.36 (all my others
run 2.2.10), PPP betw
On 24-May-99 Frankie wrote:
>>
>> That is why I am a proponent of the debian-newbie list :)
>> Newbies helping newbies without seeming to be asking too many questions.
>
> No, thats a well bad idea - there are enough dodgy answers to questions
> on this list, without people who know NOTHING abo
Pollywog wrote:
>
> On 20-May-99 Brian Servis wrote:
> >>> No. They have support for SMP systems. Read the documentation.
> >>>
> >>> I think you win the award for the most frequent poster!
> >>
> >> Sorry, I will refrain from asking so many questions. I did read the
> >
> > You don't really nee
On 20-May-99 Brian Servis wrote:
>>> No. They have support for SMP systems. Read the documentation.
>>>
>>> I think you win the award for the most frequent poster!
>>
>> Sorry, I will refrain from asking so many questions. I did read the
>
> You don't really need to do that. If people(like m
*- On 20 May, Pollywog wrote about "Re: are the 2.2.x kernels for SMP systems
only?"
>
> On 20-May-99 Brian Servis wrote:
>> *- On 20 May, Pollywog wrote about "are the 2.2.x kernels for SMP systems
>> only?"
>>> Are the 2.2.x kernels for SMP syst
On 20-May-99 Brian Servis wrote:
> *- On 20 May, Pollywog wrote about "are the 2.2.x kernels for SMP systems
> only?"
>> Are the 2.2.x kernels for SMP systems only? I have a PentiumII with only
>> one
>> processor in it.
>>
>
> No. They have su
No. 2.2.x kernels just have better smp support in them. Just turn off
symetric multi-processing when you make the kernel.
Rob
On Thu, 20 May 1999, Pollywog wrote:
> Are the 2.2.x kernels for SMP systems only? I have a Pentiu
*- On 20 May, Pollywog wrote about "are the 2.2.x kernels for SMP systems only?"
> Are the 2.2.x kernels for SMP systems only? I have a PentiumII with only one
> processor in it.
>
No. They have support for SMP systems. Read the documentation.
I think you win the award fo
Pollywog spoke forth with the blessed manuscript:
> Are the 2.2.x kernels for SMP systems only? I have a PentiumII with only one
> processor in it.
>
>
> --
> Andrew
No, they also work in single CPU applications. When you compile your kernel
uncheck the Symmetric Multi
Are the 2.2.x kernels for SMP systems only? I have a PentiumII with only one
processor in it.
--
Andrew
On Sat, May 01, 1999 at 08:31:42PM -0700, Paul Nathan Puri wrote:
> On Sat, 01 May 1999 19:39:07 Debian project development discussion wrote:
> >Is there some magic involved with IP forwarding for the 2.2.x kernels?
> >
> > # CONFIG_IP_MASQUERADE is not set
>
> IP MASQ
On Sat, May 01, 1999 at 11:18:23PM -0400, Will Lowe wrote:
> > Is there some magic involved with IP forwarding for the 2.2.x kernels?
>
> Are you using IPCHAINS at all? Are you trying to do NAT?
Yes to ipchains. No to
> Is there some magic involved with IP forwarding for the 2.2.x kernels?
Are you using IPCHAINS at all? Are you trying to do NAT?
Will
--
| [EM
Is there some magic involved with IP forwarding for the 2.2.x kernels?
I have a box with a brand-new Debian installation (slink), a custom-
built 2.2.5 kernel, and a pair of ne2000 ethernet cards. I can ping
systems going out through both cards, so I know they are both working.
I just cannot get
Hmm, interesting i have been experiencing similar performance , potato,
2.2.6-ac2,
56K the bits burn down the line then suddenly fizzle, then pick up then die,
may just
be coincidence ie maybe just my isp acting up.
Im rather trying to sort out another problem :)
Brian Servis wrote:
> Ever sin
Ever since I have upgraded to the 2.2.x kernel on my slink, and bits of
potato, system ppp is very flaky over a dialup 56k line. Often I am
downloading a package or other large file and the download stalls. I
can stop and restart the download and it will continue for a bit longer
and the stall a
Hi,
We're going to install a new server next week, and I'm interested in any
opinions regarding the stability of 2.2.x kernels. I'm leaning towards
using a 2.1.125 kernel since we're using that elsewhere and it's
extremely stable. I've heard rumors that the 2.2.
31 matches
Mail list logo
