Re: [gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 08:45, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: daid kahl wrote: I tried closely comparing the current working kernel with newly built one. I mean side by side with `make menuconfig' running in both sources. I cannot tell what it is I'm overlooking. Please do not do this. Instead emerge kccmp to compare kernel configurations! It is much easier...trust me, I tried brute-force as well! Thanks for the tip... that tool does look useful. At least for kernel comparison I think it might beat the poop out of the ediff mode in emacs. Although the emacs tools are better in general. I managed to get the kernel figured out... (with plenty of help here) but I think I'll tinker with kccmp, see how it works, and be ready for next time. It's really easy. You just run it with two configuration files as inputs, and it gives a nice X display with different settings, and then settings that are only in one config or the other (resulting from different kernel versions or sub-config options). Answering a dozen or so questions on the cmdline beats the poop out of flopping around in menuconfig, or even worse, 2 instances of menuconfig. What is really maddening is that I once knew how to do the stuff with .config and `make oldconfig'. Here lately I seem to forget things I once knew if I don't use the knowledge for a mnth or two. I always do it from the command line with a web-browser searching http://cateee.net/ for any config I don't know what it is. ~daid Sounds like he may as well use that genkernel thingy that Gentoo has. It never has worked for me but he may have better luck. It may even work on the first try. LOL I've been using genkernel for 4+ years, of course had some problema along the way, nothing that couldn't be handle. I find it really easy to use. Yeah, it worked first time, some tweaking later and BANG! It was perfect! -- Daniel da Veiga
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
Daniel da Veiga wrote: On Sun, Nov 8, 2009 at 08:45, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote: daid kahl wrote: Sounds like he may as well use that genkernel thingy that Gentoo has. It never has worked for me but he may have better luck. It may even work on the first try. LOL I've been using genkernel for 4+ years, of course had some problema along the way, nothing that couldn't be handle. I find it really easy to use. Yeah, it worked first time, some tweaking later and BANG! It was perfect! I tried that thing several times in its early days, it never made a kernel that would even boot up. I did better doing mine by hand. I have not tried it recently so I am sure it has improved a lot by now. It may build a mighty fine kernel now but I can do the same thing with oldconfig and know for sure what I am getting. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
I tried closely comparing the current working kernel with newly built one. I mean side by side with `make menuconfig' running in both sources. I cannot tell what it is I'm overlooking. Please do not do this. Instead emerge kccmp to compare kernel configurations! It is much easier...trust me, I tried brute-force as well! Thanks for the tip... that tool does look useful. At least for kernel comparison I think it might beat the poop out of the ediff mode in emacs. Although the emacs tools are better in general. I managed to get the kernel figured out... (with plenty of help here) but I think I'll tinker with kccmp, see how it works, and be ready for next time. It's really easy. You just run it with two configuration files as inputs, and it gives a nice X display with different settings, and then settings that are only in one config or the other (resulting from different kernel versions or sub-config options). Answering a dozen or so questions on the cmdline beats the poop out of flopping around in menuconfig, or even worse, 2 instances of menuconfig. What is really maddening is that I once knew how to do the stuff with .config and `make oldconfig'. Here lately I seem to forget things I once knew if I don't use the knowledge for a mnth or two. I always do it from the command line with a web-browser searching http://cateee.net/ for any config I don't know what it is. ~daid
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
daid kahl wrote: I tried closely comparing the current working kernel with newly built one. I mean side by side with `make menuconfig' running in both sources. I cannot tell what it is I'm overlooking. Please do not do this. Instead emerge kccmp to compare kernel configurations! It is much easier...trust me, I tried brute-force as well! Thanks for the tip... that tool does look useful. At least for kernel comparison I think it might beat the poop out of the ediff mode in emacs. Although the emacs tools are better in general. I managed to get the kernel figured out... (with plenty of help here) but I think I'll tinker with kccmp, see how it works, and be ready for next time. It's really easy. You just run it with two configuration files as inputs, and it gives a nice X display with different settings, and then settings that are only in one config or the other (resulting from different kernel versions or sub-config options). Answering a dozen or so questions on the cmdline beats the poop out of flopping around in menuconfig, or even worse, 2 instances of menuconfig. What is really maddening is that I once knew how to do the stuff with .config and `make oldconfig'. Here lately I seem to forget things I once knew if I don't use the knowledge for a mnth or two. I always do it from the command line with a web-browser searching http://cateee.net/ for any config I don't know what it is. ~daid Sounds like he may as well use that genkernel thingy that Gentoo has. It never has worked for me but he may have better luck. It may even work on the first try. LOL Dale :-) :-)
[gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
daid kahl daid...@gmail.com writes: 2009/11/4 Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com: I'll say right from the start, that building a new kernel, has always been a problem for me. I don't remember ever not having a problem, in 10+ yrs.. Many people here seem to find it completely easy... not me. I tried closely comparing the current working kernel with newly built one. I mean side by side with `make menuconfig' running in both sources. I cannot tell what it is I'm overlooking. Please do not do this. Instead emerge kccmp to compare kernel configurations! It is much easier...trust me, I tried brute-force as well! Thanks for the tip... that tool does look useful. At least for kernel comparison I think it might beat the poop out of the ediff mode in emacs. Although the emacs tools are better in general. I managed to get the kernel figured out... (with plenty of help here) but I think I'll tinker with kccmp, see how it works, and be ready for next time. Really though, the whole problem was due to my foolish failure to put the old .config into the new sources, before running `make oldconfig. I think it would have gone off nice and smooth if I had. Answering a dozen or so questions on the cmdline beats the poop out of flopping around in menuconfig, or even worse, 2 instances of menuconfig. What is really maddening is that I once knew how to do the stuff with .config and `make oldconfig'. Here lately I seem to forget things I once knew if I don't use the knowledge for a mnth or two.
[gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
Graham Murray graham at gmurray.org.uk writes: You have to copy the .config from the running (old) kernel to the new kernel directory before running make oldconfig. If you start with the default config, then you have to run make menuconfig (or config or xconfig) to customise it every time. Hm, I thought when you install a new kernel, you just change the symbolic link. example (old kernel linux-2.6.30-gentoo-r4) New kernel (linux-2.6.30-gentoo-r5) cd /usr/src rm linux ls -sf /usr/src/linux-2.6.30-gentoo-r5 linux cd linux make menuconfig At this point the new kernel sources (linux-2.6.30-gentoo-r5) automatically copies over the .config from the version of the kernel you are actually running. If no changes are required, save and build and setup new kennel. If something changes then the .config is modified by 'make menuconfig'. So minor kernel version revisions are trivial, but major kernel revision updated (like 2.6.30.x to 2.6.31.x) require your perusal of the menuconfig choices.(caveat emptor). Did I miss something? Dirt simple. Here are my steps: from /usr/src/linux: make make modules_install then cp System.map /boot/System.map-2.6.30-gentoo-r5 cp arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage /boot/kernel-2.6.30-gentoo-r5 cp .config /boot/config-2.6.30-gentoo-r5 Edit grub. Keep at least 2 copies of know working kernels around, in case you have to revert or look at something old Or did I miss something. That 'oldconfig' stuffage is not required any more. Or did I miss something? Last, if you are talking about hardware that is fixed (mobo, Hard drive (file systems), video cards(video drivers) etc etc, I always hard compile that into the kernel. I'd add to that mouse and keyboard, cause headaches can occur if those are loadable (others will disagree). But if you swap out usb keyboards quite often, either compile all choices into the kernel or use loadable modules. Stuff like external HD, usb or things that routinely get plugged and unplugged to/from the system, should definitely be loadable modules. imho. hth, James
[gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
John H. Moe john...@optusnet.com.au writes: I stopped using that option in my systems, as there is now a AHCI SATA option to use instead. It appears CONFIG_ATA_SFF (which CONFIG_ATA_PIIX requires) is deprecated. From the help on it: Do you notice some kind of difference from switching?
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
On 11/3/2009 11:10 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: hamiltonhamil...@pobox.com writes: Just checking - but you didn't mention: did you copy the .config to the new kernel src directory? If not, that would certainly explain the disparity in configuration settings you're seeing. I think you can say make `oldconfig' and the `old config' is supposed to be incorporated so no I didn't If I had put .confg into the new sources, then plain make menuconfig is what I would have used. Do you know where the man pages or docs for that stuff is .. its not in `man make' The 'make' man page wouldn't know anything about the kernel's makefile. You want the README file that's included in the top of the kernel source folder. That file says, among other things: make oldconfig Default all questions based on the contents of your existing ./.config file and asking about new config symbols. You need to already have a .config file in the source tree in order for 'make oldconfig' to work; otherwise you are going to get the default answers to just about every question. The benefit of this is that you don't have to search through the entire menu tree in the UI to find what's new. When you're ready to build a new kernel version, you should copy the .config file from your current kernel into the new source tree. For example, if you use 'make install' it will copy .config to /boot/config-kernel version; from there you can copy it back to /usr/src/linux/.config for the next version. When you run 'oldconfig' you should rarely get more than a few dozen questions, and it should all be on truly new items that didn't exist in your previous kernel. The hardware drivers you selected should all carry over as-is. --Mike
[gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
On 11/04/2009 06:16 AM, james wrote: Graham Murray graham at gmurray.org.uk writes: You have to copy the .config from the running (old) kernel to the new kernel directory before running make oldconfig. If you start with the default config, then you have to run make menuconfig (or config or xconfig) to customise it every time. Hm, I thought when you install a new kernel, you just change the symbolic link. example (old kernel linux-2.6.30-gentoo-r4) New kernel (linux-2.6.30-gentoo-r5) cd /usr/src rm linux ls -sf /usr/src/linux-2.6.30-gentoo-r5 linux cd linux make menuconfig Well, if you really want to use menuconfig first, you need to repeat the entire configuration process from the beginning. Make oldconfig is there exactly so you *don't* need to repeat everything manually. At this point the new kernel sources (linux-2.6.30-gentoo-r5) automatically copies over the .config from the version of the kernel you are actually running... That sentence doesn't make sense. You said the sources automatically copy the .config -- but the sources don't do anything. Only a program could do something automatically, not source code files. It may be that genkernel does something like that, but I've never used it so I don't know. If you are building your kernel manually (as you seem to be doing) then *you* need to copy the .config from the old sources over to your new kernel source directory and *then* do make oldconfig. That's when the magic happens, not before. You'll see lots of interesting stuff if you run 'make help' in the kernel source directory.
[gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
Mike Edenfield kut...@kutulu.org writes: The 'make' man page wouldn't know anything about the kernel's makefile. You want the README file that's included in the top of the kernel source folder. That file says, among other things: make oldconfig Default all questions based on the contents of your existing ./.config file and asking about new config symbols. You need to already have a .config file in the source tree in order for 'make oldconfig' to work; otherwise you are going to get the default answers to just about every question. The benefit of this is that you don't have to search through the entire menu tree in the UI to find what's new. Thanks for clearing that stuff up, and the pointer to documentation.
[gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
On 2009-11-04, Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com wrote: Just checking - but you didn't mention: did you copy the .config to the new kernel src directory? If not, that would certainly explain the disparity in configuration settings you're seeing. I think you can say make `oldconfig' and the `old config' is supposed to be incorporated No, it isn't. so no I didn't That's the problem. If I had put .config into the new sources, then plain make menuconfig is what I would have used. No, that's when you use make oldconfig: when you've placed a .config file from an old kernel into the build directory. Doing a make oldconfig will used the existing .config file as much as possible and ask you questions about new choices. Do you know where the man pages or docs for that stuff is .. its not in `man make' Have you tried looking in the 'Documentation' directory in the linux source tree? I'd like to check some of that. Good idea. -- Grant Edwards grante Yow! ... I'm IMAGINING a at sensuous GIRAFFE, CAVORTING visi.comin the BACK ROOM of a KOSHER DELI --
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
Am Mittwoch 04 November 2009 02:46:54 schrieb Harry Putnam: But am I missing some critical driver? Harddisk (CONFIG_BLK_DEV_SD=y), maybe? That's one reason for unknown block device. Bye... Dirk signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
Am Mittwoch 04 November 2009 05:10:52 schrieb Harry Putnam: I think you can say make `oldconfig' and the `old config' is supposed to be incorporated so no I didn't No, that's only half of the truth. You need to copy .config from your old kernel first. I'd compile the config into the kernel, so that you can access it from the running kernel any time, via /proc/config(.gz). If I had put .confg into the new sources, then plain make menuconfig is what I would have used. This is how I do it since years. Works fine. Never used oldconfig. Do you know where the man pages or docs for that stuff is .. its not in `man make' But in make help when you are in the kernel source directory. HTH... Dirk signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
[gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
Dirk Heinrichs dirk.heinri...@online.de writes: If it still won't work, you can also post your kernel config and the output of lspci -vv here and somebody will find out what's wrong/missing. Good input thanks. I did get it working. It was an IDE selection I missed. From the lspci -vv you mentioned (aggravating because I knew that since long ago) shows: 00:1f.1 IDE interface: Intel Corporation 82801EB/ER (ICH5/ICH5R) IDE Controller (rev 02) (prog-if 8a [...] Kernel driver in use: PIIX_IDE Here is the part that throws the monkey wrench in: make menuconfig /PIIX_IDE No matches found. Without fiddling around more I'm still not sure which setting it is. One of the settings checked here I think: | ++ | | |--- Serial ATA (prod) and Parallel ATA (experimental) drivers | | | |[*] ATA ACPI Support | | | |[ ] SATA Port Multiplier support | | | |AHCI SATA support | | | |Silicon Image 3124/3132 SATA support | | | |[*] ATA SFF support | | | | ServerWorks Frodo / Apple K2 SATA support | | | |* Intel ESB, ICH, PIIX3, PIIX4 PATA/SATA support | | | | Marvell SATA support Now that I got things to boot... I'm sick of looking at this stuff... hehe
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
Harry Putnam wrote: I think you can say make `oldconfig' and the `old config' is supposed to be incorporated so no I didn't The 'oldconfig' option needs your old .config for input (that where old comes from :-) I usually manually go through the 'make menuconfig' as well after doing this to see if there's anything I want to change, new options that may be useful or read up on (help text for the various options usually give you a nice hint)... Do you know where the man pages or docs for that stuff is .. its not in `man make' Make is a general build tool and not specific to the kernel. The option 'oldconfig' and friends are defined in the Makefile in the /linux directory... Best regards Peter K
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
Harry Putnam wrote: John H. Moe john...@optusnet.com.au writes: I stopped using that option in my systems, as there is now a AHCI SATA option to use instead. It appears CONFIG_ATA_SFF (which CONFIG_ATA_PIIX requires) is deprecated. From the help on it: Do you notice some kind of difference from switching? Well, my understanding is that SATA controllers can operate in one of two modes: AHCI (or native) mode, which allows for the full capabilities (read: SPEED) of the SATA interface, and an IDE-compatible mode, for things like Windows XP (which I use at work) that doesn't, by default, understand SATA. If you try to load WinXP on to a PC with SATA, you either have to switch the SATA controller to IDE-mode, which allows WinXP to see it as a normal IDE hard drive, or load a SATA driver at install time (from a floppy! One of the few things I still need 3.5 floppies for). Translating this to Linux (at home), I chose the AHCI option when it showed up in one kernel upgrade, and when I saw in the help for ATA_SFF that it's the legacy IDE interface, I figured I didn't need it, so I left it out. So if I understand this correctly, you should use the AHCI option if your SATA controller is in AHCI or Native mode, and the ATA_SFF option if you're in IDE or Compatible mode. Hope this helps (and makes sense) John Moe
[gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com writes: your drivers for the ide disks have to be built INTO THE KERNEL! NOT MODULES. Is that really a hard rule? I've done it both ways successfully in the past. And in fact, I didn't record my first builds on this kernel but I'm pretty sure my first build did have all PIIX stuff built in. Not to be argumentative but did you notice that both old and new kernel have exactly the same module and built-ins concerning PIIX Yet one recognizes /dev/hda5 and runs and the other doesn't zgrep PIIX /proc/config.gz (this is 2.6.30-r1) CONFIG_BLK_DEV_PIIX=y CONFIG_ATA_PIIX=m CONFIG_PATA_MPIIX=y # CONFIG_PATA_OLDPIIX is not set CONFIG_I2C_PIIX4=m Try the same thing on the newbuild: grep PIIX /usr/src/linux/.config 2.6.31-r4 CONFIG_BLK_DEV_PIIX=y CONFIG_ATA_PIIX=m CONFIG_PATA_MPIIX=y # CONFIG_PATA_OLDPIIX is not set CONFIG_I2C_PIIX4=m Also, you need to compile in the filesystem, not as module. Again, I've done it both ways successfully in the past. Why do we have module choices for these things? ---- ---=--- - So is that all you see in the failed boot messages that gives any clue to why it fails. I'm building them in on this build... I hope it works But am I missing some critical driver?
[gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
On 11/03/2009 02:29 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: I'll say right from the start, that building a new kernel, has always been a problem for me. I don't remember ever not having a problem, in 10+ yrs.. Many people here seem to find it completely easy... not me. So I'm back in the soup. [I hope what I try to layout below is not overly confusing] (After install of gentoo-sources-2.6.31-r4) I started with `make oldconfig' Moved from that to `make menuconfig'... There's no reason to use menuconfig after running oldconfig, If your old kernel was using all of the hardware, then the new kernel should, too, just with oldconfig. Volker makes an excellent point. Support for your disk controller and for your file system(s) must be built into the kernel unless you use initrd to load those modules *before* the kernel tries to mount /. That's a pain and isn't necessary for most machines because you know in advance what hardware you have and which file systems you use. (But your kernel doesn't know in advance unless the right drivers are compiled in ;o)
[gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
walt w41...@gmail.com writes: There's no reason to use menuconfig after running oldconfig, If your old kernel was using all of the hardware, then the new kernel should, too, just with oldconfig. I don't know about that. I found a whole lot of stuff different when I ran menuconfig and checked the old and new settings. I just made a partial list by comparing the oldkernel settings in menuconfig and the new kernel after running make oldconfig. And this is only SOME of them, got tired of it part way thru: Some of these really seem like they should have ended up marked the same after oldconfig ---- ---=--- - Automatically append version string on in old off in new BSD accounting off in old On in new Export Task process thru netlink off in old, on in new Auditing support off in old, on in new Namespc support all off in old all on in new. Network support/wireless off in old, on in new Amatuer radio support off in old, on in new RFswitch subsys support off in old On in new Networking/ multicasting off in old on in new Advanced router off in old On in new BOOTTP off in old on in new RARP off in old on in new TCP advanced congestion control off in old, on in new. ipv6 off in old, on in new I gave up after that... so if you think oldconfig means you get the same settings by and large... it doesn't.
[gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:02:18 -0800, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/03/2009 02:29 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: I'll say right from the start, that building a new kernel, has always been a problem for me. I don't remember ever not having a problem, in 10+ yrs.. Many people here seem to find it completely easy... not me. So I'm back in the soup. [I hope what I try to layout below is not overly confusing] (After install of gentoo-sources-2.6.31-r4) Just checking - but you didn't mention: did you copy the .config to the new kernel src directory? If not, that would certainly explain the disparity in configuration settings you're seeing. I started with `make oldconfig' Moved from that to `make menuconfig'... -- Jon Hamilton hamil...@pobox.com
[gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
hamilton hamil...@pobox.com writes: On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:02:18 -0800, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/03/2009 02:29 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: I'll say right from the start, that building a new kernel, has always been a problem for me. I don't remember ever not having a problem, in 10+ yrs.. Many people here seem to find it completely easy... not me. So I'm back in the soup. [I hope what I try to layout below is not overly confusing] (After install of gentoo-sources-2.6.31-r4) Just checking - but you didn't mention: did you copy the .config to the new kernel src directory? If not, that would certainly explain the disparity in configuration settings you're seeing. I think you can say make `oldconfig' and the `old config' is supposed to be incorporated so no I didn't If I had put .confg into the new sources, then plain make menuconfig is what I would have used. Do you know where the man pages or docs for that stuff is .. its not in `man make' I'd like to check some of that.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
Harry Putnam wrote: hamilton hamil...@pobox.com writes: On Tue, 03 Nov 2009 17:02:18 -0800, walt w41...@gmail.com wrote: On 11/03/2009 02:29 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: I'll say right from the start, that building a new kernel, has always been a problem for me. I don't remember ever not having a problem, in 10+ yrs.. Many people here seem to find it completely easy... not me. So I'm back in the soup. [I hope what I try to layout below is not overly confusing] (After install of gentoo-sources-2.6.31-r4) Just checking - but you didn't mention: did you copy the .config to the new kernel src directory? If not, that would certainly explain the disparity in configuration settings you're seeing. I think you can say make `oldconfig' and the `old config' is supposed to be incorporated so no I didn't If I had put .confg into the new sources, then plain make menuconfig is what I would have used. Do you know where the man pages or docs for that stuff is .. its not in `man make' I'd like to check some of that. I always do this: cp /path/to/old/kernel/.config /path/to/new/kernel/.config . Then run make oldconfig and configure all the new stuff. I usually answer no to everything but there is exceptions. After that, make all make modules_install and either run make install or copy it the old fashioned way. Then edit grub if needed and reboot. Do all that in /usr/src/linux especially the make parts. It has worked for me for quite a while. I do have a hiccup every once in a while but usually something else is wrong. Dale :-) :-)
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes: I think you can say make `oldconfig' and the `old config' is supposed to be incorporated so no I didn't If I had put .confg into the new sources, then plain make menuconfig is what I would have used. That is the wrong way round! make oldconfig uses the .config in the kernel directory, which in the case of an upgrade is the *default* (ie without any customisations) config. make oldconfig does *not* operate on the running kernel. You have to copy the .config from the running (old) kernel to the new kernel directory before running make oldconfig. If you start with the default config, then you have to run make menuconfig (or config or xconfig) to customise it every time.
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: kernel build - back in the soup.
On Wednesday 04 November 2009 03:46:54 Harry Putnam wrote: Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com writes: your drivers for the ide disks have to be built INTO THE KERNEL! NOT MODULES. Is that really a hard rule? I've done it both ways successfully in the past. If you do not use an initrd|initramfs, then the drivers for the chipset and the filesystem on / do need to be built into the kernel. The drivers are on the disk and the kernel needs to read the drivers from the disk to read the disk to get the drivers :-) chicken and egg. If you use an initrd/initramfs or have genkernel make one for you, then the drivers are on that ramdisk and the kernel can see and load them so all is well. -- alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
