I see that some has filed bug #33793 on this. Beat to the punch again!
Bob
On Wed, 24 Feb 1999, Bob Nielsen wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Feb 1999, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:58:24 -0700 (MST), Bob Nielsen wrote:
> >
> > >I just compiled 2.2.2 using make-kpkg (kernel-package 6
On Wed, 24 Feb 1999, Ralf G. R. Bergs wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:58:24 -0700 (MST), Bob Nielsen wrote:
>
> >I just compiled 2.2.2 using make-kpkg (kernel-package 6.07) and using the
> >command 'make-kpkg --revision=custom.1.0 kernel_image' it created a file
> >
> >kernel-image-.._custom.1.0_
E.L. Meijer (Eric) wrote:
> Read the mail again. Instead of 2.2.2 for the kernel-version, he gets
> `..'. This is no good.
Sorry, I misunderstood him. I thought he used ".." as an ellipsis to
indicate that he left something out.
> On Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:58:24 -0700 (MST), Bob Nielsen wrote:
>
> >I just compiled 2.2.2 using make-kpkg (kernel-package 6.07) and using the
> >command 'make-kpkg --revision=custom.1.0 kernel_image' it created a file
> >
> >kernel-image-.._custom.1.0_i386.deb
> >
> >Where does make-kpkg get the k
On Tue, 23 Feb 1999 20:58:24 -0700 (MST), Bob Nielsen wrote:
>I just compiled 2.2.2 using make-kpkg (kernel-package 6.07) and using the
>command 'make-kpkg --revision=custom.1.0 kernel_image' it created a file
>
>kernel-image-.._custom.1.0_i386.deb
>
>Where does make-kpkg get the kernel version?
5 matches
Mail list logo