Re: kernel building ways

2001-12-27 Thread Jesse Goerz
On Thursday 27 December 2001 14:58, Sam Varghese wrote: > On Thu, Dec 27, 2001 at 01:20:55PM +0100, Romain Lerallut wrote: > > Thus spake wsa on Thu, Dec 27, 2001 at 12:56:06PM +0100: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I'm just trying to build my second kernel... > > > Last time i did it, the kernel-how-to way

Re: kernel building ways

2001-12-27 Thread Sam Varghese
On Thu, Dec 27, 2001 at 01:20:55PM +0100, Romain Lerallut wrote: > Thus spake wsa on Thu, Dec 27, 2001 at 12:56:06PM +0100: > > Hi, > > > > I'm just trying to build my second kernel... > > Last time i did it, the kernel-how-to way, resulted in a few module dep > > errors... > > So i've searched t

Re: kernel building ways

2001-12-27 Thread Michael P
On Thu, 27 Dec 2001, wsa wrote: > Which one would be the most stable? > 10 .12 .13 .14 or .16? I would go for 2.4.17. 2.4 has stopped regressing, and looks to be getting better with every release, so I'd stick with the newest if I were you.

Re: kernel building ways

2001-12-27 Thread wsa
Hi, Okidoki...thanks for the help. One more thing...i think i'm gonna jumpt to the 2.4 kernel...using the debian kernel packages. Which one would be the most stable? 10 .12 .13 .14 or .16? Cheerios At 13:20 27-12-2001 +0100, you wrote: make-kpkg needs some debian-specific stuff, but debian's k

Re: kernel building ways

2001-12-27 Thread Romain Lerallut
Thus spake wsa on Thu, Dec 27, 2001 at 12:56:06PM +0100: > Hi, > > I'm just trying to build my second kernel... > Last time i did it, the kernel-how-to way, resulted in a few module dep > errors... > So i've searched the web and also came across this one: > http://newbiedoc.sourceforge.net/system