On Sat, Nov 18, 2000 at 07:22:46AM +0100, Erik van der Meulen wrote:
>
> I have a Linux 2.2 (upgraded from 2.1 apart from the kernel) box that
i assume you mean `Debian' and not `Linux' Linux is just a kernel,
GNU/Linux is the operating system, Debian is the distribution. i
assume you now have
I seem to need to finally upgrade my kernel to 2.2.17. I have been
posponding this as long as possible, not because of the fine Debian
upgrade package, but because of expected networking trouble whilst
having to part with ipmasq.
Now it seems I need to take the dive (In comes the first
Win2000 bo
Debian Users
>Cc:The recipient's address is unknown.
>Subject: samba: anyone else get "Can't become connected user!" with
>potato
>version 2.0.4b-3 & kernel 2.0.34?
>
>I upgraded a box to potato and now samba doesn't work. I've looked
I upgraded a box to potato and now samba doesn't work. I've looked in
the samba archives and the postings I found suggest that this is because
the newer versions of samba use a setresuid call (or don't) and get a
bad return value (http://us1.samba.org/listproc/samba-ntdom/1639.html).
One user says
On Sun, May 23, 1999 at 11:16:19AM -0500, Gregory T. Norris wrote:
> Are you trying to apply the patch to the pristine kernel source, or to
> the debianized version? The .deb version has various patches applied
> already (for additional hardware support, bugfixes, etc.), and so will
> very likely
On Sun, 23 May 1999, Ian Winter wrote:
> Most of the patches do work though. From reading the README.Debian it
> looks like it might be related to the patches Debian have previously
> applied.
That probably is it.
Also, before i patch i always backup my old .config and 'make mrproper' to
get t
Are you trying to apply the patch to the pristine kernel source, or to
the debianized version? The .deb version has various patches applied
already (for additional hardware support, bugfixes, etc.), and so will
very likely produce rejects. I'm not sure where to find a description
of the patches w
Hi,
I am having problems patching the source from the kernel-source-2.0.34
deb up to kernel 2.0.36. I downloaded the patchfiles from
ftp.uk.kernel.org and applied them using
bunzip2 -c patch-2.0.35.bz2 | patch -p0
It basically fails, complaining about several previously applied
patches
thanks for the quick repsonse...I was unable to get to the machine for a
week...
here's the output you asked for
output of ping
ping: sendto:operation not performed
ping: wrote: 202.186.1.10 64 chars, ret=-1
output of route -n
Kernel IP routing table
Destination
Gateway
On Tue, Mar 16, 1999 at 07:12:34PM -0600, Paul Miller wrote:
> "G. Crimp" wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > Anybody know what an unresolved symbol is ? I've just compiled a
>
> This is a function call or variable that the modules wishes to use but
> cannot find.
>
> > kernel making iso9660 su
"G. Crimp" wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Anybody know what an unresolved symbol is ? I've just compiled a
This is a function call or variable that the modules wishes to use but
cannot find.
> kernel making iso9660 support a module. I've done this in bo with no
> problems. In hamm, however, when
Hi,
Anybody know what an unresolved symbol is ? I've just compiled a
kernel making iso9660 support a module. I've done this in bo with no
problems. In hamm, however, when I try to mount a cd, I get an error saying
that the kernel does not support iso9660 filesystems. kerneld is running
> -Original Message-
> From: Nathan E Norman [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> I "grew up" with Slackware too; I find the ability to put the
> kernel and
> its associated modules in a deb file, but then I use one machine to
> compile kernels for the various machines we have, since it's much
> fa
On Mon, 30 Nov 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
: On Mon, Nov 30, 1998 at 12:43:32PM -0600, Nathan E Norman wrote:
: > : We'll find out shortly. I'm FTPing the sources from sunsite.
Never did
: > : like the Debian way of doing the Kernel.
:
: > Why not?
:
: Because I was a Slackware p
On Mon, Nov 30, 1998 at 03:40:49PM -0700, Gary L. Hennigan wrote:
> The short of it is, learn to use make-kpkg. It'll make life a LOT
> easier on your new Debian system.
It's also a lot easier to compile kernels for other systems with it.
I have some 486 systems for which I prefer to build on fast
On Mon, Nov 30, 1998 at 01:28:50PM -0800, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Because I was a Slackware person before I was a Debian person. I don't
> like how the headers are split from the code. I've never cared to learn the
> "Debian way" when "make dep ; make clean ; make zlilo ; shutdown -r now"
> works
On Mon, Nov 30, 1998 at 03:40:49PM -0700, Gary L. Hennigan wrote:
> The "make zlilo" approach is problematic if you have something else
> that depends on a specific kernel version (Read the file
> /usr/doc/kernel-package/Rationale.gz for 11 or so reasons you want to
> use make-kpkg).
All of wh
Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| On Mon, Nov 30, 1998 at 12:43:32PM -0600, Nathan E Norman wrote:
| > : We'll find out shortly. I'm FTPing the sources from
| > sunsite. Never did
| > : like the Debian way of doing the Kernel.
|
| > Why not?
|
| Because I was a Slackware person b
On Mon, Nov 30, 1998 at 12:43:32PM -0600, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> : We'll find out shortly. I'm FTPing the sources from sunsite. Never
> did
> : like the Debian way of doing the Kernel.
> Why not?
Because I was a Slackware person before I was a Debian person. I don't
like how the h
On Sun, 29 Nov 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
: On Sun, Nov 29, 1998 at 10:22:24AM +0100, Egon Schmid wrote:
: > Oh sorry, I have never tried to build a kernel the Debian way. So I have
: > to symlink the header files according the README. Could it be that there
: > is something wrong?
:
: We'
Steve Lamb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
| [1 ]
| On Mon, Nov 30, 1998 at 01:39:25PM +1100, Richard Lyon wrote:
| > > We'll find out shortly. I'm FTPing the sources from sunsite. Never
| > > did like the Debian way of doing the Kernel.
| > >
|
| > GULP This seems a bit drastic, "make zlilo
On Mon, Nov 30, 1998 at 01:39:25PM +1100, Richard Lyon wrote:
> > We'll find out shortly. I'm FTPing the sources from sunsite. Never
> > did like the Debian way of doing the Kernel.
> >
> GULP This seems a bit drastic, "make zlilo" works for me with 2.0.34.
> It almost seems like you ha
> We'll find out shortly. I'm FTPing the sources from sunsite. Never did
> like the Debian way of doing the Kernel.
>
GULP This seems a bit drastic, "make zlilo" works for me with 2.0.34. It
almost seems like you have not installed all the right development bits. Have
you got a copy o
On Sat, Nov 28, 1998 at 01:35:54PM +0100, Ingo Hohmann wrote:
> I have compiled the a custom 2.0.34 Kernel from the
> hamm sources, on a hamm system. I installed with
> "make zlilo". On startup I get errors about unresolved
> symbols in the vfat modules.
Did you also do "make modules; make module
Hi,
I have compiled the a custom 2.0.34 Kernel from the
hamm sources, on a hamm system. I installed with
"make zlilo". On startup I get errors about unresolved
symbols in the vfat modules.
Any ideas, whats going wrong ???
(by the way, there were some typos in the sources,
one in af_inet, the o
On Sun, Nov 29, 1998 at 10:22:24AM +0100, Egon Schmid wrote:
> Oh sorry, I have never tried to build a kernel the Debian way. So I have
> to symlink the header files according the README. Could it be that there
> is something wrong?
We'll find out shortly. I'm FTPing the sources from sunsite.
Oh sorry, I have never tried to build a kernel the Debian way. So I have
to symlink the header files according the README. Could it be that there
is something wrong?
-Egon
On Sun, 29 Nov 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 29, 1998 at 10:02:00AM +0100, Egon Schmid wrote:
> > Install the kernel
On Sun, Nov 29, 1998 at 10:02:00AM +0100, Egon Schmid wrote:
> Install the kernel header files.
I hate to say it, but I am not that stupid. Neither is dselect.
*** Opt develkernel-heade 2.0.34-42.0.34-4Header files related
*** Opt develkernel-sourc 2.0.34-42.0.34-4L
Install the kernel header files.
-Egon
On Sun, 29 Nov 1998, Steve Lamb wrote:
> Anyone else get this when doing a make zlilo with 2.0.34?
>
> ld -m elf_i386 -Ttext 0x1000 -e startup_32 -o vmlinux head.o misc.o piggy.o
> make[2]: Leaving directory
> /usr/src/kernel-source-2.0.34/arch/i386/b
Anyone else get this when doing a make zlilo with 2.0.34?
ld -m elf_i386 -Ttext 0x1000 -e startup_32 -o vmlinux head.o misc.o piggy.o
make[2]: Leaving directory
/usr/src/kernel-source-2.0.34/arch/i386/boot/compres
sed'
gcc -I/usr/src/kernel-source-2.0.34/include -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer
-D__B
> 3com cyclone has been reported to work with kernel 2.0.35. But I
> am stuck until AIC7890 will be supported in 2.0.x ?
>
> Does this mean I am locked ? Anyone has a tip or suggestion ?
Both support for aic7890 and ethernet are drivers; you can download the updates
for aic7890/3com 3c590b you
>
> Hi,
> I run an ASUS P2B-LS motherboard with AIC 7890 SCSI , so I had
> to install a special kernel image (2.0.34) from ~doko/aic7xxx.
>
> But I have also a 3com cyclone card (3C905B) which doesn't work.
> I recompiled 3c59x.c with kernel-sources-2.0.34, but it still gives
> "ff:ff:ff:ff:f
Hi,
I run an ASUS P2B-LS motherboard with AIC 7890 SCSI , so I had
to install a special kernel image (2.0.34) from ~doko/aic7xxx.
But I have also a 3com cyclone card (3C905B) which doesn't work.
I recompiled 3c59x.c with kernel-sources-2.0.34, but it still gives
"ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff" station add
Buenas, tenia instalado la version 1.3 de Debian con el Kernel 2.0.29
que me soportaba mi controladora Scsi Tekram DC-390, cuando instale
la Debian 2.0 , SORPRESA !! el nuevo Kernel 2.0.34 no soprta mi
controladora, me da un error "disconect queue ..." y me da un
Kernel Panic !!!
On Mon, 6 Jul 1998, Shaleh wrote:
> > gcc: Internal compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 11
>
> sig11 (signal 11) is often a sign of a hardware problem. Either you
> machine is over/under clocked, over heating, has a memory glitch or
> something. Sig 11 can also be one of the problems
*-Patrick Olson ( 6 Jul)
|
| I've been running Debian 1.3.1 with kernel 2.0.29
|
| I decided to upgrade to kernel 2.0.34 but it fails during make zImage with
| an error message. Can anyone help?
|
| Here's the error message and a few of the lines before it:
|
| gcc -D__KERNEL__
On Mon, 6 Jul 1998, Shaleh wrote:
> > gcc: Internal compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 11
>
> sig11 (signal 11) is often a sign of a hardware problem. Either you
> machine is over/under clocked, over heating, has a memory glitch or
> something. Sig 11 can also be one of the problems t
> gcc: Internal compiler error: program cc1 got fatal signal 11
sig11 (signal 11) is often a sign of a hardware problem. Either you
machine is over/under clocked, over heating, has a memory glitch or
something. Sig 11 can also be one of the problems that appears and then
never re-appears.
--
I've been running Debian 1.3.1 with kernel 2.0.29
I decided to upgrade to kernel 2.0.34 but it fails during make zImage with
an error message. Can anyone help?
Here's the error message and a few of the lines before it:
gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/linux-2.0.34/include -Wall -Wstrict-
I just installed Debian 2.0 Beta from CD but am still using my old
kernel (2.0.29). The apt-get -f dist-upgrade downloaded source 2.0.34 for
me, but the cd contains version 2.0.34-2. Any recommendations on which
one I should use? Thanks,
Tom
--
Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EM
Hi,
I have a problem with the mentioned combination. When i run pon to
establish a ppp-connection pppd immediately exits with the error message
"tcgetatt (5)"
During booting it says ppp Version 2.2.0. But i installed ppp2.3.5. Now,
do i need to upgrade my kernel ? I´ve seen some patches in var. n
On Mon, 15 Jun 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> What is the significance of packages being in Incoming?
> Is it safe to d/l and use them from there, or do things in Incoming have
> further processing to undergo before being ready for use?
If I have it straight:
New packages are uploaded to /incom
What is the significance of packages being in Incoming?
Is it safe to d/l and use them from there, or do things in Incoming have
further processing to undergo before being ready for use?
Thanks,
Timothy
On 15-Jun-98 Bob Nielsen wrote:
> On Mon, 15 Jun 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Do
On Mon, 15 Jun 1998 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Does anyone know when the .deb package for the 2.0.34 kernel source
> will be available? Will it be soon, or should I go ahead use a tgz? (What are
> the disadvantages of this as opposed to using the .deb file?)
There's a kernel source packag
Does anyone know when the .deb package for the 2.0.34 kernel source
will be available? Will it be soon, or should I go ahead use a tgz? (What are
the disadvantages of this as opposed to using the .deb file?)
Thanks,
Timothy
--
E-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date
Just installed kernel 2.0.34 (had 2.0.33-9) in hamm/frozen and
nls_iso8859-1 failed to load. Finally put it ahead of cp_437 in
"modules" and it loaded after this. Was fine in 2.0.33-9. Is there an
oddity with my hamm/frozen?
Also have Midnight Commander 4.1.35 with "Pause after ru
Dale Scheetz wrote:
> While I do not think that you meant it, it sounds like you think that Dave
> and others might exploit your machine.
>
> As I said, I am pretty certain that that was not what you were trying to
> say ;-)
I meant to imply that Dave was nicely holding info about those problems
Jesse Goldman wrote:
> This may be a silly question but it's related vaguely to the above which
> has already been brought up. Has anyone had trouble with AIC7XXX support
> for 2.0.34? Apparently, there have been many changes since 2.0.33 and it
> doesn't seem to work properly for me anymore.
Wo
On Thu, Jun 04, 1998 at 11:10:19PM -0400, James D. Freels wrote:
> Fellow Linux users:
>
> I have downloaded both the patch and then the complete source for the
> newly released 2.0.34 kernel. It appears that at least the following
> filesystems are no longer supported in the kernel: FAT, msdos, v
This may be a silly question but it's related vaguely to the above which
has already been brought up. Has anyone had trouble with AIC7XXX support
for 2.0.34? Apparently, there have been many changes since 2.0.33 and it
doesn't seem to work properly for me anymore.
J. Goldman
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
On Thu, 4 Jun 1998 23:10:19 -0400 (EDT), James D. Freels wrote:
>I have downloaded both the patch and then the complete source for the
>newly released 2.0.34 kernel. It appears that at least the following
>filesystems are no longer supported in the kernel: FAT, msdos, vfat,
>iso9660. Could this b
Fellow Linux users:
I have downloaded both the patch and then the complete source for the
newly released 2.0.34 kernel. It appears that at least the following
filesystems are no longer supported in the kernel: FAT, msdos, vfat,
iso9660. Could this be true? If so, why?
I realize that this is not
52 matches
Mail list logo
