On Sat, Dec 30, 2000 at 02:50:56AM +, Rob VanFleet wrote:
>
> The gist I got from it was that the headers in /usr/src/linux should be those
> headers that glibc was compiled against, regardless of what kernel you're
> actually running. Like if you were running potato with the kernel upgraded
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 08:10:52PM +, Oliver Elphick wrote:
> Brian Keck wrote:
> >On the question of /usr/src/linux & symlinks, Linus sent a couple
> >of messages to linux-kernel a few months ago ...
>
>
> Yes, but these refer to the commonly found link from /usr/include/asm
> into /usr
Brian Keck wrote:
>On the question of /usr/src/linux & symlinks, Linus sent a couple
>of messages to linux-kernel a few months ago ...
Yes, but these refer to the commonly found link from /usr/include/asm
into /usr/src/linux/include; that is the link that should not be there.
Linus is saying
On the question of /usr/src/linux & symlinks, Linus sent a couple
of messages to linux-kernel a few months ago ...
Brian Keck
--- Forwarded Messages
>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Jul 27 17:49:26 2000
X-Authentication-Warning: palladium.transmeta.com: mail set sender to [EMAIL
PROTECTED] using
On Fri, Dec 29, 2000 at 10:21:30AM -0600, David A. Rogers wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Dec 2000, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> I understand your comment about fakeroot. However, I didn't include any
> documentation on it for a couple of reasons.
>
> First, I've instructed the reader to read the kernel-package
Carel,
Thanks for your input. I appreciate knowing what people think of the
document.
On Thu, 28 Dec 2000, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 08:12:05PM -0600, David A. Rogers wrote:
> > Kernel 150 - Compiling the kernel - is open for enrollment (The Debian
> > University documen
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 05:34:57PM -0600, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 05:05:30PM -0600, Rob VanFleet wrote:
> > > I think there's confusion between making links in /usr/include and
> > > links in /usr/src. The first is bad [0], the second is (afaik) not.
> >
> > Hmm, as I und
Rob VanFleet wrote:
>In /usr/share/doc/kernel-package/README.gz:
>
> "...unpack your kernel somewhere. Preferably somewhere other than
> /usr/src/linux..."
>
>It also adds "more on this later", but I found no explanation as to why, jus
>t
>some possible places to un
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 05:34:57PM -0600, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> I'm not trying to be rude, but the only person saying the
> /usr/src/linux symlink is bad is you (and you don't sound convinced :)
First of all, I'm *not* the only person saying that; I refer you to:
http://lists.debian.org/debian
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 05:40:23PM -0600, Rob VanFleet wrote:
> In /usr/share/doc/kernel-package/README.gz:
>
> "...unpack your kernel somewhere. Preferably somewhere other than
> /usr/src/linux..."
Unpacking implies a directory, which is not the same as a symlink.
Don't worry about t
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 05:05:30PM -0600, Rob VanFleet wrote:
...
> Hmm, as I understood it, making a /usr/src/linux link is bad, /usr/include,
> AFAIK, is not the issue. The module I tried to compiled looked for the
> kernel-includes in /usr/src/linux/include. I'm just wondering why
> /usr/src/l
In /usr/share/doc/kernel-package/README.gz:
"...unpack your kernel somewhere. Preferably somewhere other than
/usr/src/linux..."
It also adds "more on this later", but I found no explanation as to why, just
some possible places to unpack the sources to, none of which are
/
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 05:05:30PM -0600, Rob VanFleet wrote:
> > I think there's confusion between making links in /usr/include and
> > links in /usr/src. The first is bad [0], the second is (afaik) not.
>
> Hmm, as I understood it, making a /usr/src/linux link is bad, /usr/include,
> AFAIK, is
Rob VanFleet wrote:
>
> Hmm, as I understood it, making a /usr/src/linux link is bad, /usr/include,
> AFAIK, is not the issue. The module I tried to compiled looked for the
> kernel-includes in /usr/src/linux/include. I'm just wondering why
> /usr/src/linux is bad, and how to tell compiles to lo
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 04:54:54PM -0600, Nathan E Norman wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 04:30:07PM -0600, Rob VanFleet wrote:
> > On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 07:29:12PM +0100, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> > > I think it would be wise (and more debian like:) to explain how to
> > > compile the kernel as
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 04:30:07PM -0600, Rob VanFleet wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 07:29:12PM +0100, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> > I think it would be wise (and more debian like:) to explain how to
> > compile the kernel as *non* root using fakeroot. Furthermore I seem
> > to recall discussions
On Thu, Dec 28, 2000 at 07:29:12PM +0100, Carel Fellinger wrote:
> I think it would be wise (and more debian like:) to explain how to
> compile the kernel as *non* root using fakeroot. Furthermore I seem
> to recall discussions on this list that it's better to refrain from
> using/creating that /u
On Wed, Dec 27, 2000 at 08:12:05PM -0600, David A. Rogers wrote:
> Kernel 150 - Compiling the kernel - is open for enrollment (The Debian
> University document has been updated to include information on compiling the
> kernel in the Debian way).
>
> Debian University can be found at:
>
> http://h
Kernel 150 - Compiling the kernel - is open for enrollment (The Debian
University document has been updated to include information on compiling the
kernel in the Debian way).
Debian University can be found at:
http://home.xnet.com/~darogers/debian_university.txt
make-kpkg is very nice and makes
19 matches
Mail list logo
