On Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:46:55 -0400 (EDT), Jen wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> My name is Jen, and I'm new to the list. I've been playing with
> Linux on and off for about a year, but have only recently found a
> distro that meets my accessibility needs (Debian unstable). It's
> also a great learning tool :P
On 2010-03-19 16:46, Jen wrote:
Hi,
My name is Jen, and I'm new to the list. I've been playing with Linux on
and off for about a year, but have only recently found a distro that
meets my accessibility needs (Debian unstable). It's also a great
learning tool :P
I need to build some packages
Jen wrote:
Hi,
My name is Jen, and I'm new to the list. I've been playing with Linux on and
off for about a year, but have only recently found a distro that meets my
accessibility needs (Debian unstable). It's also a great learning tool :P
I need to build some packages from source, and I nee
On Nov 19, 2007, at 6:54 PM, Steve Kleene wrote:
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:25:58 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
I use VMware Server 56528 and am quite happy with it.
Wished I could start vmware + XP without the intervening prompts of
the
vmserver-console.
I've been very happy with 39867 excep
On Mon, 19 Nov 2007 16:25:58 -0600, Hugo Vanwoerkom wrote:
> I use VMware Server 56528 and am quite happy with it.
> Wished I could start vmware + XP without the intervening prompts of the
> vmserver-console.
I've been very happy with 39867 except that the moment my USB scanner starts
to scan, it
Steve Kleene wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 14:00:36 -0500, I wrote:
I have vmware working again. I uninstalled all of the old linux-headers,
reinstalled the one that matches my kernel, and then also had to install the
g++ package. I don't know if every bit of this was necessary, but it worked.
On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 14:00:36 -0500, I wrote:
> I have vmware working again. I uninstalled all of the old linux-headers,
> reinstalled the one that matches my kernel, and then also had to install the
> g++ package. I don't know if every bit of this was necessary, but it worked.
On Mon, 19 Nov 200
Steve Kleene wrote:
On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:30:16 -0500, I wrote:
This machine is running Etch 2.6.18-5-686. For some time, "apt upgrade" has
been holding back linux-kernel-headers_2.6.18-6. I just installed it anyway.
I rebooted, and the only problem I see so far is that I can't get vmware
reb
On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 08:30:16 -0500, I wrote:
> This machine is running Etch 2.6.18-5-686. For some time, "apt upgrade" has
> been holding back linux-kernel-headers_2.6.18-6. I just installed it anyway.
> I rebooted, and the only problem I see so far is that I can't get vmware
> rebuilt.
On Sun,
Steve Kleene wrote:
This machine is running Etch 2.6.18-5-686. For some time, "apt upgrade" has
been holding back linux-kernel-headers_2.6.18-6. I just installed it anyway.
I rebooted, and the only problem I see so far is that I can't get vmware
rebuilt. But first:
1. Was it a mistake to inst
Christopher Pharo Glæserud wrote:
Marty,
There are a set of packages which supply the latest kernel headers
(currently 2.6.15), kernel-headers-2.6-* where "*" is your CPU
architecture. To show them run this command:
apt-cache search kernel-headers-2.6-
Aren't these packages now called linux
Adam Black wrote:
Hi all.
I'm running debian from within VMware Workstation, and VMware tools
needs the kernel headers to compile. The only kernel headers I can
find are for 2.6.8 can anyone tell me where to go to get headers for
2.6.15, or what I can use instead of headers?
On machine run
Marty,
> There are a set of packages which supply the latest kernel headers
> (currently 2.6.15), kernel-headers-2.6-* where "*" is your CPU
> architecture. To show them run this command:
>
> apt-cache search kernel-headers-2.6-
Aren't these packages now called linux-headers?
--
regards,
Ch
Adam Black wrote:
Hi all.
I'm running debian from within VMware Workstation, and VMware tools
needs the kernel headers to compile. The only kernel headers I can
find are for 2.6.8 can anyone tell me where to go to get headers for
2.6.15, or what I can use instead of headers?
There are a set o
riginal Message -
> From: "Colin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To:
> Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 11:01 PM
> Subject: Re: Kernel Headers
>
>
> > Stephen Grant Brown wrote:
> > > Got tarball of Linux Kernel 2.6.11.7, and compilled and installed it.
> &g
From: "Colin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To:
Sent: Sunday, May 29, 2005 11:01 PM
Subject: Re: Kernel Headers
> Stephen Grant Brown wrote:
> > Got tarball of Linux Kernel 2.6.11.7, and compilled and installed it.
> >
> > Modules do not work.
> >
> >
Stephen Grant Brown wrote:
Got tarball of Linux Kernel 2.6.11.7, and compilled and installed it.
Modules do not work.
Tried to re-install tarball of faubackup but it fails too.
How do I correctly install the Linux Kernel tarball, the faubackup tarball
and the correct header files? If it is RTF
On Sat, 28 May 2005 22:56:57 +1000
"Stephen Grant Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi All,
Hi
> How do I correctly install the Linux Kernel tarball,
Why do you want to choose the hard way when there is a much nicer one,
installing the kernel the debian way. Just search for that term on [ent
On Sun, Jan 19, 2003 at 12:25:12PM -0500, David Z Maze wrote:
> Jeff Penn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > I have read through the kernel-header docs, & am still not sure I
> > understand what they are for. I assumed that they enable source to be
> > compiled when using a kernel-image.
> >
> > If
Jeff Penn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I have read through the kernel-header docs, & am still not sure I
> understand what they are for. I assumed that they enable source to be
> compiled when using a kernel-image.
>
> If this is correct, what is the procedure for compiling i2c-source or
> lm-
#include
* Jeff Penn [Sat, Jan 18 2003, 10:12:40AM]:
> I have read through the kernel-header docs, & am still not sure I
> understand what they are for. I assumed that they enable source to be
> compiled when using a kernel-image.
>
> If this is correct, what is the procedure for compiling i2c
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 05:27:01PM -0500, Edward Guldemond wrote:
> You can just use the headers from the kernel-source package. The headers
> are in /usr/src/kernel-source-X.X.XX/include
well that's only partially true though. if any thing changes
those headers (like updating the kernel source
On Thu, Dec 05, 2002 at 10:41:29PM +0100, Aedificator wrote:
> If a make a custom kernel using the kernel-package, do I have to rebuild
> also the kernel-headers? If this is true, how do I do it? Or is it good
> enough to install the old ones, provid that I only recompiled my old kernel?
You can j
If it helps anyone,
I have done the following :
1. got my CDs back :=)
2. installed the KERNEL SOURCE of 2.2.19pre17
apt-get kernel-source-2.2.19pre17
that gives me the headers as well!!!
Feeling kinda silly!
mike
--- Bob Thibodeau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On my system,
>
> apt-cache search
Thanks bob,
I have the exact same installed.
Funny
my uname -r returns 2.2.19pre17.
/etc/netlock/nlvcard.o was compiled for kernel
version 2.2.19pre17-compact
while this kernel is version 2.2.19pre17.
Anyway, does anyone have this netlock VPN client for
linux running? Or has used free
On my system,
apt-cache search kernel-headers
shows (among others)
kernel-headers-2.2.19pre17-compact
kernel-headers-2.2.19pre17-idepci
you probably want one of those
Bob
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 11:27:47AM -0700, James Michael DuPont wrote:
> Sorry to bother you all again,
> This is what I ge
Sorry to bother you all again,
This is what I get out.
I have tried looking everywhere on the net and cannot
find the headers.
I would recompile my kernel so I have the headers that
fit, but I am not that good. Something keeps the
kernel from booting, maybe it is to big.
>>apt-get install kernel-
-i is the dkpg switch for install
you want apt-get install kernel-headers-2.2.19pre17
It's in the help text
Bob
On Thu, Apr 18, 2002 at 12:09:26AM -0700, James Michael DuPont wrote:
> Dear Debian Kernel Hackers.
> I think that I must have done something wrong and
> please excuse the stupid quest
On Mon, Dec 03, 2001 at 10:33:26AM -0800, ben wrote:
> i compiled and installed the 2.4.14 kernel the non-debian way and
> unstable seems to run just fine.
Of course.
> i was wondering what the actual advantages of using the kernel headers
> are?
You only need to care about kernel headers if you
Courtney Thomas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Goodday !
>
> How do you "install the headers from the debian package that corresponds
> to your running kernel" ?
>
> Pardon my ignorance but I've no knowledge of such. A URL, if nothing
> else, would be appreciated.
>
Try installing the kernel-he
Rory O'Connor, 2001-Nov-13 00:28 -0600:
> I'm trying to install VMware on debian and all goes smoothly until it
> tries to find a 'vmmon' module for my kernel. it's asking for the dir
> where my C header files are, but then saying that they don't match the
> version i'm running. i don't see ho
"Rory O'Connor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm trying to install VMware on debian and all goes smoothly until it
> tries to find a 'vmmon' module for my kernel. it's asking for the dir
> where my C header files are, but then saying that they don't match the
> version i'm running. i don't s
Rory O'Connor wrote:
>I'm trying to install VMware on debian and all goes smoothly until it
>tries to find a 'vmmon' module for my kernel. it's asking for the dir
>where my C header files are, but then saying that they don't match the
>version i'm running. i don't see how that's possible. h
On Sun, Aug 26, 2001 at 11:33:20PM -0700, Jeff wrote:
> I upgraded my potato system to the 2.4.9 kernel via Adrian Bunk's
> packages, all went smoothly.
>
> One thing that confuses me is the purpose of the "kernel-headers"
> package. I installed it, and it put some files in
> /usr/src/kernel-heade
On 14 Aug 2001 22:27:20 -0700, Shawn Lamson wrote:
> Hello everyone - I am new to Debian - used to use
> Caldera OL 2.3 but I am not super proficient in Linux.
> I am trying to install ALSA and it wants to use the
> kernel headers from 2.2.19pre17... I have tried:
> a)kernel-headers-2.2.19pre17-ide
Did you try apt-get -i kernel-headers-2.2.19pre17
--- Patrick Boe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> the current stable debian distribution includes
> kernel version
> 2.2.19pre17. a look at the source packages in
> http://packages.debian.org/stable/devel/ shows,
> however, that though the
> entire s
Jan Ulrich Hasecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JUH> Where is the package kernel-headers-2.4.5-k7? I cannot find it on
JUH> testing. Do I need it to build a kernel on an Athlon-System? Or can I
JUH> use kernel-headers-2.4.5?
You shouldn't need any kernel-headers package to build your own
kernel, on
On 20-Jun-99 Pollywog wrote:
> I looked for some missing header files on Debian's website and there don't
> seem to be any devel/kernel-headers-2.2.10 packages. Any ideas as to why?
> Perhaps I should backpedal to kernel 2.2.9
>
Nevermind, I found the package; it just did not show up on one of
On Mon, Apr 13, 1998 at 04:48:46PM +, Rev. Joseph Carter wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 13, 1998 at 03:46:48PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
>
> > > Granted, OSS/Linux is an example of how NOT to write a driver for Linux,
> > > and OSS/Free is worse, but.
> >
> > Some day in the future, the ALSA (Alte
On Mon, Apr 13, 1998 at 03:46:48PM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote:
> > Granted, OSS/Linux is an example of how NOT to write a driver for Linux,
> > and OSS/Free is worse, but.
>
> Some day in the future, the ALSA (Alternative Linux Sound Architecture) may
> take over. It is (L)GPL'ed software. Hel
> That is precisely correct. libc6-dev depends on one exact set
> of headers from an exact kernel version. This is documented. The
> dependencies are correct.
>
> manoj
Thanks, that's what I wanted to know.
jabberwock
###By lack of understanding they remained sane. (George Orw
On Mon, Apr 13, 1998 at 04:15:21AM +, Rev. Joseph Carter wrote:
> Granted, OSS/Linux is an example of how NOT to write a driver for Linux,
> and OSS/Free is worse, but.
Some day in the future, the ALSA (Alternative Linux Sound Architecture) may
take over. It is (L)GPL'ed software. Help is app
Hi,
>>"George" == George Bonser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
George> Ok fine, so what do I do to get a system done correctly
George> running 2.1.X?
George> It looks like I, at first, point the symlinks to the kernel
George> source provided headers. Compile glibc. Create a
George> kernel_headers pa
Hi,
>>"George" == George Bonser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
George> On 12 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> Nothing but libc6-dev is supposed to set symlinks in /usr/include;
>> certainly the kernel packages should not.
>>
George> YES they SHOULD! If the /usr/include symlinks are
Hi,
>>"George" == George Bonser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
George> I just keep /usr/src/linux symlinked to the current source
George> directory. Example: on slowpoke /usr/src/linux is a symlink to
George> /usr/src/linux-2.1.95. In this way, patches that try to patch
George> against both /usr/src/
Hi,
Congratulations! You have just introduced a subtle bug on your
system. It may work, and possibly never cause a problem, but
there is a bomb ticking away, waiting to explode ;-)
There is a reason there is a versioned dependency for
libc6-dev. The reasons are explained in a l
Hi,
>>"George" == George Bonser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
George> Oh, well then just --force depends!
Use force anything and you are on your own. Using the wrong
set of headers (which is what you shall be doing if you use force)
has been known to hose compilation.
Please do
Hi,
>>"Tamas" == Tamas Papp <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Tamas> My problem was that I couldn't not substitute
Tamas> kernel-headers-2.0.32 with kernel-headers-2.0.33 in the sense
Tamas> that libc6-dev depends on the former but it doesn't accept the
Tamas> latter instead, so my problem was a depende
Hi,
>>"George" == George Bonser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
George> On 12 Apr 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
kernel-source-> version> may not supply the same headers as
kernel-headers-> version>, especially on non intel hardware. There
>> fore the dependency in libc6-dev is correct.
>>
> > Nothing but libc6-dev is supposed to set symlinks in
> > /usr/include; certainly the kernel packages should not.
> >
>
> YES they SHOULD! If the /usr/include symlinks are pointed to
> /usr/src/kernel-headers-2.0.29 and you install kernel-source-2.0.32 you
> MUST change those symlink
On Sun, Apr 12, 1998 at 04:20:00PM -0700, George Bonser wrote:
> > kernel-source- may not supply the same headers as
> > kernel-headers-, especially on non intel hardware. There
> > fore the dependency in libc6-dev is correct.
> >
> > manoj
>
> The problems I saw were in installing a k
On Sun, Apr 12, 1998 at 03:42:12PM -0600, Tamas Papp wrote:
> My problem was that I couldn't not substitute kernel-headers-2.0.32 with
> kernel-headers-2.0.33 in the sense that libc6-dev depends on the former
> but it doesn't accept the latter instead, so my problem was a dependency
> problem.
I
Hi,
Nothing but libc6-dev is supposed to set symlinks in
/usr/include; certainly the kernel packages should not.
manoj
--
Abandoning violence to all living creatures moving or still, he who
neither kills or causes killing - that is what I call a brahmin. 405
Manoj Srivastava
Hi,
kernel-source- may not supply the same headers as
kernel-headers-, especially on non intel hardware. There
fore the dependency in libc6-dev is correct.
manoj
--
It is either through the influence of narcotic potions, of which all
primitive peoples and races speak in hymns
> Oh, well then just --force depends!
It's NOT the solution, just a treatment of the sympthom. I'm asking
whether there is a real reason or is it a mistake.
> But you are better off staying well clear of 2.0.33 unless there is some
> hardware support there that you absolutely HAVE to have. 2.0.33
> I have noticed some problems with some of the kernel packages not setting
> the symlinks properly in /usr/include/linux, /usr/include/asm and
> /usr/include/scsi. I have not reported it because I have not been exactly
On my system, asm and linux are perfect and scsi is not a symlink.
> > Does an
On Fri, Mar 06, 1998 at 11:00:50AM -0500, Stephen Carpenter wrote:
> Steve Hsieh wrote:
>
> > A1: Occasionally, changes in the kernel headers cause problems with
> > the compilation of libc and of programs that use libc. To ensure that
> > users are not affected by these problems, we configure li
On Fri, 6 Mar 1998, Stephen Carpenter wrote:
>
> > By the way, the most recent OSS should take care of all of this stuff
> > automatically, I believe. I install OSS without having to touch any of
> > the links (which point to 2.0.32 headers). I am using kernel 2.0.33 and
> > OSS for 2.0.33 with
Steve Hsieh wrote:
> On Fri, 6 Mar 1998, Stephen Carpenter wrote:
>
> > Can someone explain to me please this whole debian kernel headers
> > thing?
>
> > then I got curious here at work (I am installing at home) and noticed
> > that /usr/include/linux is a sym link to /usr/src/kerenel-headers-
On Fri, 6 Mar 1998, Stephen Carpenter wrote:
> Can someone explain to me please this whole debian kernel headers
> thing?
> I use OSS/Linux (unfortunatly my sound card is of a type where I can't
> use anything else)
> and I plan to upgrade to the new version of it later today...
> they say that be
Miroslav Ruda wrote:
:
: I think old Slackware idea (/usr/include/{linux,asm,net} are links to
: /usr/src/linux/include/{linux,asm,net}) is more better. I can simly upgrade
: kernel_source and not yet libc5 to have same version of kernel headers.
:
: Is any reason why not to use this schema in
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Miroslav Ruda) writes:
> Is any reason why not to use this schema in Debian too?
Read /usr/doc/libc5/FAQ.gz
--
Rob
H. J. Lu writes ("Re: kernel headers"):
> >
> > This has already been debated enough. Debian will continue to include
> > known-working kernel headers with libc unless and until that
> > arrangement proves to be unworkable. As I have time, I will continue
Hello,
> So, in this case, how is it better for the header files to reflect the
> kernel than the library ?
The library is rather uncritical for system programming. You have a function
"ioctl()" which will never change it interface in ages, but there are all
those little parameters which tend to
>
> This has already been debated enough. Debian will continue to include
> known-working kernel headers with libc unless and until that
> arrangement proves to be unworkable. As I have time, I will continue
> to encourage H.J. Lu and other Linux distributors to do the same.
I still prefer to u
> Manoj Srivastava <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > The headers were included in libc5-dev after a rash of very
> > buggy alpha kernel releases (1.3.7* or something like that) that
> > proceeded to break compilations, etc. Kernel versions are changed
> > far more rapidly than libc is, and th
Hello,
> The headers were included in libc5-dev after a rash of very
> buggy alpha kernel releases (1.3.7* or something like that) that
> proceeded to break compilations, etc. Kernel versions are changed
> far more rapidly than libc is, and there are higer chances that
> people install
> disagree on this issue. I still don't feel it is right to put kernel headers
> anywhere except with the kernel (or perhaps as their own package). If people
So just think of them as libc headers instead of kernel headers.
That's really how they are being used when referenced as
/usr/include/*.
>
Hi,
>>"Kevin" == Kevin M Bealer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Kevin> But will it break anything major if I don't follow this
Kevin> guideline, and esp. is there a temporary way to set things up
Kevin> 'the old way'? Most of what I compile right now wants kernel
Kevin> headers so it can be compatib
Manoj Srivastava said:
[reasoning for putting kernel headers in with libc packages]
Your reasoning is understandable, however, we will just have to agree to
disagree on this issue. I still don't feel it is right to put kernel headers
anywhere except with the kernel (or perhaps as their own package
On 20 May 1996, Manoj Srivastava wrote:
(clip)
> The kernel-source package is a superset of the kernel-headers
> package, so the headers have not been "separated" from the rest of
> the source.
(clip)
> manoj
> --
> Everyone has a purpose in life. Perhaps yours is watching televisi
Hi,
>>"Scott" == Scott Barker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Scott> I guess I wasn't clear enough -- I was actually wondering why
Scott> kernel headers were included anywhere *except* with the kernel
Scott> source. I can see some logic in having a kernel-headers package
Scott> for those who don't wan
Hi,
>>"Scott" == Scott Barker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Scott> Is there a good reason that the kernel headers have been
Scott> separated from the kernel source? I think it is a very Bad
Scott> Thing to separate the headers from the kernel. The kernel is
Scott> the heart of the whole system, and
Manoj Srivastava said:
> The kernel headers package are for those people who are
> not satisfied with the headers in libc5-dev, (or don't have
> libc5-dev, in which case I wonder why they want the headers at all,
> since compilation (I think) depends on having libc5-dev), and also
> don't
74 matches
Mail list logo
