Adam Aube wrote:
> On Friday 06 February 2004 04:23 am, David Baron wrote:
> > The new kernel image would not boot up because of "missing" modules.dep
> > references. Does one need to build the whole thing or is there a way to
> > simply use the newer kernel with the modules that are already on the
On Friday 06 February 2004 04:23 am, David Baron wrote:
> The new kernel image would not boot up because of "missing" modules.dep
> references. Does one need to build the whole thing or is there a way to
> simply use the newer kernel with the modules that are already on the
> system?
Try running "
On Friday 06 February 2004 08:45, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
> You can boot to a console and use "apt-get install kernel-image" to see a
> list of available kernel images (with versions). Pick a newer kernel from
> the list and install that.
I tried that. The new kernel image would not boot up beca
On Thursday 05 February 2004 05:44 pm, Matt Richardson wrote:
> Sorry to ask such a silly question, but I haven't found a good answer
> for it on google. I've got a Dell GX115 box running a basic Debian
> system from the 3.0r2 installation cds, with kernel 2.2. I tried the
> bf24 install, but it
On Thursday February 5 at 02:44pm
Matt Richardson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sorry to ask such a silly question, but I haven't found a good answer
> for it on google. I've got a Dell GX115 box running a basic Debian
> system from the 3.0r2 installation cds, with kernel 2.2. I tried the
> bf24
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002, Charles Parker wrote:
> I don't see a 2.4 kernel in the stable Debian packages. I've been told it's
> usually NOT a good idea to take a kernel directly from kernel.org because it
> won't contain the customizations provided by your distribution, and things
> will likely break. I
"Charles" == Charles Parker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Charles> I don't see a 2.4 kernel in the stable Debian
Charles> packages. I've been told it's usually NOT a good idea to
Charles> take a kernel directly from kernel.org because it won't
Charles> contain the customizations
On Fri, 2002-03-08 at 20:49, Scott Henson wrote:
> You need to dist-upgrade to woody if you want a 2.4.x kernel.
Wrong. See other post in thread
Also
> cooking your own kernel from kernel.org sources work just fine. There
> shouldn't be anything wrong with it.
You need new modutils and pos
On Fri, 2002-03-08 at 19:52, Charles Parker wrote:
> I don't see a 2.4 kernel in the stable Debian packages.
http://www.fs.tum.de/~bunk/kernel-24.html
--
I did not vote for the Austrian government
begin Charles Parker quotation:
> I don't see a 2.4 kernel in the stable Debian packages. I've been told it's
> usually NOT a good idea to take a kernel directly from kernel.org because
> it won't contain the customizations provided by your distribution, and
> things will likely break.
Not t
begin Rich Puhek quotation:
> I don't believe Debian "customizes" the kernel at all. There are
> pre-compiled versions available with different options set (see things
> like "kernel-image-2.2.19-compact" and "kernel-image-2.2.19-ide"
There are also usually some extra patches applied, which I p
* Charles Parker ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) spake thusly:
... I've been told it's
> usually NOT a good idea to take a kernel directly from kernel.org because
> it won't contain the customizations provided by your distribution, and
> things will likely break.
This is usually the case with DeadRat, but
On Fri, 2002-03-08 at 13:52, Charles Parker wrote:
> I don't see a 2.4 kernel in the stable Debian packages. I've been told it's
> usually NOT a good idea to take a kernel directly from kernel.org because it
> won't contain the customizations provided by your distribution, and things
> will like
Charles Parker wrote:
>
> I don't see a 2.4 kernel in the stable Debian packages. I've been told it's
> usually NOT a good idea to take a kernel directly from kernel.org because it
> won't contain the customizations provided by your distribution, and things
> will likely break. I've also been told
"JACKSON, DEAN" wrote:
>
> Help my hard drive has sustained very large physical damage. it boots sort
> of. as I use a multi processor system I would like to keep my kernel (it was
> a pain to configure)
> what is the best way of backing up my kernel? and restoring it!
>
> Dean Jackson
> TeleWare
This WON't be easy if you're systemdisk is really damaged.
It's pretty hard to explain this in an email because of the variety of
conditions, let us know if you're getting somewhere or feeling rather lost.
Did you allready boot into single user mode and run efsck2 ? Maybe you're
just experiencing
:: On Thu, 06 Jul 2000 21:22:06 +0300, Heikki Vatiainen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
said:
> In my experience, it is. The laptop I'm using has a 2.4.0-test3
> kernel and the machine at home,
Where did you get a "2.4.0-test3" kernel? The last one I saw was
test2.. There was also a "test2-ac22", in Alan's
Walter Williams wrote:
>
> Greetings
>
> I have subscribed to this list server to find
> out more about non-Red Hat derivatives.
> Is the Debian distribution of the type that I
> can, when I want to update the kernel,
> download a complete kernel tar ball or a patch
> file from what ever web sit
Walter Williams wrote:
> Greetings
>
> I have subscribed to this list server to find
> out more about non-Red Hat derivatives.
> Is the Debian distribution of the type that I
> can, when I want to update the kernel,
> download a complete kernel tar ball or a patch
> file from what ever web site
Walter Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have subscribed to this list server to find
> out more about non-Red Hat derivatives.
> Is the Debian distribution of the type that I
> can, when I want to update the kernel,
> download a complete kernel tar ball or a patch
> file from what ever we
On Thu, Jul 06, 2000 at 12:14:13PM -0600, Walter Williams wrote:
> Greetings
>
> I have subscribed to this list server to find
> out more about non-Red Hat derivatives.
> Is the Debian distribution of the type that I
> can, when I want to update the kernel,
> download a complete kernel tar ball
On Wed, Jan 05, 2000 at 06:57:29PM -0500, Brian Servis wrote:
> *- On 5 Jan, Pollywog wrote about "kernel question"
> > I just found out that Linux kernel 2.2.14 is out and it is stable.
> > Debian does not yet have a kernel-source-2.2.14-deb out. Can I just use a
> > regular kernel source tarbal
*- On 6 Jan, Pollywog wrote about "Re: kernel question"
>>
>> Basically anything with a letter will be fine, something like
>> pollywog.1. Use dpkg to check it if you are not sure.
>>
>>#dpkg --compare-versions 2.2.14-1 ge pollywog.1 ; echo $?
>
On 05-Jan-2000 Brian Servis wrote:
> Just do it! Just use make-kpkg with a revision name that will be
> greater than 2.2.14-1(this will be the version number of the
> kernel-image once it is released) and you will be fine.
>
> make-kpkg --revision=pollywog.1 kernel_image
I did it this way for
*- On 5 Jan, Pollywog wrote about "kernel question"
> I just found out that Linux kernel 2.2.14 is out and it is stable.
> Debian does not yet have a kernel-source-2.2.14-deb out. Can I just use a
> regular kernel source tarball to make a custom kernel image the Debian way?
> I have done this bef
On 05-Jan-2000 Pollywog wrote:
> I just found out that Linux kernel 2.2.14 is out and it is stable.
> Debian does not yet have a kernel-source-2.2.14-deb out. Can I just use a
> regular kernel source tarball to make a custom kernel image the Debian way?
> I have done this before but I suspect the
On Thu, Dec 30, 1999 at 11:31:53AM +0700, Oki DZ wrote:
> There is a kernel-headers package...(?)
> I'd like to download it.
I guess it's for people who need to compile modules but don't
want to download the full source. It's in main / devel, but I
haven't downloaded it.
> Once I had a problem c
On Thu, 30 Dec 1999, Paul J. Keenan wrote:
> You don't need the kernel-headers package. All the headers required are in
There is a kernel-headers package...(?)
I'd like to download it.
> the kernel-source package. You don't need the symlink either, the headers
> are included from the right pl
On 30-Dec-1999 Paul J. Keenan wrote:
> You don't need the kernel-headers package. All the headers required are in
> the kernel-source package. You don't need the symlink either, the headers
> are included from the right places automagically. I've got neither and
> can compile 2.2.13 no problems
On Wed, Dec 29, 1999 at 11:51:50PM -, Pollywog wrote:
> Do I need to make this symlink:
>
> ln -s /usr/src/linux/include /usr/include ?
>
> I already have /usr/src/kernel-sources-2.2.13 symlinked to /usr/src/linux
>
> I already have a /usr/include, which was made when I installed Potato.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Please try to keep lines to <76 chars in length.
On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, David Kanter wrote:
> I've got a custom bootdisk that works fine. I moved the kernel to my
> home directory using dd if=/dev/fd0 of=/home/david/vmlinuz. (I also
> used cat /dev/fd0 > /home/da
Quoting Brian Servis ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> >
> > Actually, if you set versioning info on all modules, you're required
> > to compile ppp support as a module. Besides that, if you use modules
> > at all, you may as well just load things as needed since you've already
> > committed to the overhead
*- On 18 Apr, Thomas S. Howard wrote about "Re: kernel question"
> On Sun, 18 Apr 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >If I compile something as a module rather than include
>> >it in the kernel, will I get a performance l
On Sun, 18 Apr 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> > If I compile something as a module rather than include
> > it in the kernel, will I get a performance loss?? If I
> > use something very often, such as ppp, should I include
> > it in the kernel or compile it as a module
>
> Hi,
> If I compile something as a module rather than include
> it in the kernel, will I get a performance loss?? If I
> use something very often, such as ppp, should I include
> it in the kernel or compile it as a module?
>
There should not be a difference. If you us
On Thu, 29 Oct 1998, Paul McDermott wrote:
: Hello my debian friends, I was wondering if anyone here could point me
: into the direction of getting the .config file of the default kernel that
: is on the boot disks. I looked on the debian site and could not find the
: maintainer of the bootdi
On Tue, 8 Jul 1997, Hamish Moffatt wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 1997 at 05:23:04PM -0600, Kevin J Poorman wrote:
> > I can't get my kernel to compile at all and when I try to compile useing
> > "make zImage" I get the following message, about 3 minutes into compile.:
> >
> > *_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_ St
> "JHV" == Jaldhar H Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JHV> On 8 Jul 1997, Emilio Lopes wrote:
>> > "JHV" == Jaldhar H Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JHV> By any chance were you compiling in an X Window? Recently, when
JHV> I recompiled my kernel I got all sorts of weird errors like thi
On 8 Jul 1997, Emilio Lopes wrote:
> > "JHV" == Jaldhar H Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> JHV> By any chance were you compiling in an X Window? Recently, when
> JHV> I recompiled my kernel I got all sorts of weird errors like this
> JHV> in an rxvt. But when I tried again from the cons
> "JHV" == Jaldhar H Vyas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
JHV> By any chance were you compiling in an X Window? Recently, when
JHV> I recompiled my kernel I got all sorts of weird errors like this
JHV> in an rxvt. But when I tried again from the console, everything
JHV> was fine. Don't ask me w
On Mon, 7 Jul 1997, Kevin J Poorman wrote:
> Hi.
>
> questions, questions
>
> How will I know if my kernel is to big for a zImage?
>
> Reason for asking
>
> I can't get my kernel to compile at all and when I try to compile useing
> "make zImage" I get the following message, about 3 m
On Mon, Jul 07, 1997 at 05:23:04PM -0600, Kevin J Poorman wrote:
> I can't get my kernel to compile at all and when I try to compile useing
> "make zImage" I get the following message, about 3 minutes into compile.:
>
> *_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_ Start Screen Dump _*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*
>
> cpp: output pip
Hi,
Kevin J Poorman ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
: I can't get my kernel to compile at all and when I try to compile useing
: "make zImage" I get the following message, about 3 minutes into compile.:
:
: *_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*_ Start Screen Dump _*_*_*_*_*_*_*_*
:
: cpp: output pipe has been close
On Mon, 07 Jul 1997 17:23:04 CDT Kevin J Poorman ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
wrote:
> How will I know if my kernel is to big for a zImage?
The build will complain at the end.
Then you just have to type 'make bzImage'.
> Reason for asking
>
> I can't get my kernel to compile at all and when I try
On Thu, 12 Jun 1997 20:46:07 EDT Matthew Tebbens ([EMAIL PROTECTED]
.net) wrote:
> I just re-compilied the kernel for my system. I used 'make menuconfig'.
> Is kernel support for JAVA binaries included by default ?
> I don't remember seeing it in menuconfig, and I don't see anything in
> /usr/src
45 matches
Mail list logo
