On 09 Feb 1999q, Roland E. Lipovits wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 09, 1999 at 09:54:03AM -, Chris Evans wrote:
> > One step at a time: anyone else moved to 2.0.35/36 while
> > retaining the rest of Hamm? I don't really want to make the move
>
> I'm using 2.0.36 on Hamm and didn't recognize any prob
On Tue, 9 Feb 1999, Chris Evans wrote:
> I am running Hamm very happily on a machine sitting in an ISP.
> However, it can't access the SCSI controller and I need to fix that
> (very nervously). I am advised that the ncr based controller is likely
> to be happier with the 2.0.35 or 2.0.36 kern
All you really need to do is get all the required packages (gcc, bin86,
etc), download the kernel source, and build as normal. Nothing special.
I've had no trouble with 2.0.x on Hamm, although 2.1/2.2 require a bit of
work.
At 05:12 AM 2/9/99 -0800, Kenneth Scharf wrote:
>--
---
>One step at a time: anyone else moved to 2.0.35/36 >while
>retaining the rest of Hamm? I don't really want to >make the move
>to slink until a while after it moves to be "stable" >but I do need to
>make this move.
---
On Tue, Feb 09, 1999 at 09:54:03AM -, Chris Evans wrote:
> One step at a time: anyone else moved to 2.0.35/36 while
> retaining the rest of Hamm? I don't really want to make the move
I'm using 2.0.36 on Hamm and didn't recognize any problems because
of this.
> Any advice on doing it so I
I am running Hamm very happily on a machine sitting in an ISP.
However, it can't access the SCSI controller and I need to fix that
(very nervously). I am advised that the ncr based controller is likely
to be happier with the 2.0.35 or 2.0.36 kernel, though it may still
need a driver/module up
6 matches
Mail list logo
