Rick Bolen (GM) wrote: > Gustin Johnson wrote: > >>> linux-libc-dev and libc6-dev are fighting over installing >>> /usr/include/scsi/scsi.h >>> >>> >> I have build-essential installed on a number of Debian and Ubuntu >> machines as well as my 64Studio machine. No problems with any of them. >> My first guess is that there is a 3rd party repository or package that >> is causing you some grief. >> >> You can try to force the install by manually installing the .deb: >> sudo dpkg -i --force-all >> /var/cache/apt/archives/libc6-dev_2.7-10ubuntu5_i386.deb >> >> >> > I did this for libc6-dev and linux-libc* and this ended the log jam. > >>> >>> >>> I typically follow the "building-a-kernel-the-debian-way" articles, but >>> they only add a few other packages. I just don't know if build-essential >>> will straighten-out\add required symlinks etc. >>> >>> >>> >> "kernel-package" is the easiest way to build a kernel (or a header or >> source) .deb. >> >> > kernel-package in now installed, and linux-source-2.6.29, > build-essential, et al. > > 1) Do I need apply the patches that came with linux-source, or they > "pre-applied" and there only if needing to "unroll"? > > 2) What ".config" file do I use to build the stock 64Studio rt-kernel? >
Just copy the /boot/config-[snip] for the default kernel to the directory were you compile the new kernel. If you build another kernel version you should run "$ make oldconfig" after doing the copy, this is an easy way to configure a new kernel with a configuration, that is outdated, because of new functions. If you only want to compile the default kernel, you only need to copy the configuration from /boot, you don't need to change any thing. If you like to change something, e.g. to optimize to your CPU, you need to run "$ make menuconfig". As an example take a look at http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg01569.html. > 3) How do I stop make-kpkg from asking me all those ".config" questions? > > My strategy to address this original problem is to build a new kernel > (and header files) per the recommendation here: > > http://groups.google.co.jp/group/linux.debian.bugs.dist/browse_thread/thread/222248608991112d > Okay, there seems to be a problem because of the used assembler or any configuration for this assembler. Yesterday I wrote "Resp. to build a kernel the needed packages might be: bin86 build-essential bzip2 fakeroot gcc kernel-package make libncurses5-dev" "bin86" is the used assembler. Hm? I installed the headers for the latest kernel I build for my 64 Studio 3.0-beta3 amd64: r...@64studio:/usr/src/kernel_packages# ls linux-headers-2.6.31.5-rt18_2.6.31.5-rt18-10.00.Custom_amd64.deb linux-image-2.6.31.6-rt19_2.6.31.6-rt19-10.00.Custom_amd64.deb linux-headers-2.6.31.6-rt19_2.6.31.6-rt19-10.00.Custom_amd64.deb linux-source-2.6.31.5-rt18_2.6.31.5-rt18-10.00.Custom_all.deb linux-image-2.6.31.5-rt18_2.6.31.5-rt18-10.00.Custom_amd64.deb linux-source-2.6.31.6-rt19_2.6.31.6-rt19-10.00.Custom_all.deb r...@64studio:/usr/src/kernel_packages# dpkg -i linux-headers-2.6.31.6-rt19_2.6.31.6-rt19-10.00.Custom_amd64.deb r...@64studio:/usr/src/kernel_packages# cd ../linux-headers-2.6.31.6-rt19/include r...@64studio:/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.31.6-rt19/include# ls -l total 144 drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 acpi lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 10 2010-01-05 13:32 asm -> asm-x86_64 drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 asm-generic drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 asm-x86 drwxr-xr-x 472 root root 28672 2010-01-05 13:32 config drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 crypto drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 drm -rw-r--r-- 1 root root 253 2009-11-10 01:32 Kbuild drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 keys drwxr-xr-x 34 root root 40960 2010-01-05 13:32 linux drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 math-emu drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 media drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 mtd drwxr-xr-x 13 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 net drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 pcmcia drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 rdma drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 rxrpc drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 scsi drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 sound drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 trace drwxr-xr-x 2 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 video drwxr-xr-x 3 root root 4096 2010-01-05 13:32 xen That's funny, indeed asm -> asm-x86_64 is a dead link for the amd64 version of 64 Studio. It might be, that deleting asm will force the makefile to use the path to asm-generic or asm-x86 instead, or whatever this looks for your 32bit version of 64 Studio 3.0-beta3. r...@64studio:/usr/src/linux-headers-2.6.31.6-rt19/include# dpkg -r linux-headers-2.6.31.6-rt19 I don't need the headers ;). > Basically they get around this Makefile_32.cpu bug by generating new > headers from source. If this works, then it seems the 64Studio distro > could do it and replace the current header file downloads with corrected > ones? > > I could go the patch route, but I don't understand how to apply the > patch. Do I, > > 1) cut and paste text sections out of the bug listing and save them to > xxx.patch files or something? > Yes, correct, e.g. by giving it the name "patch_name". > 2) Is there more than one patch (separated by the ######## line)? > It will change different files, see the diff lines, but you can copy it to one textfile and run it as one patch, you also can keep the "#####"-signs. There might be one problem, sometimes text gets wrapped on websides and emails by an automatic word wrap. Try to run it as it is posted in the original bug-report and if needed try to understand error messages and remove line breaks. > The suggestion is to: > " > > $ cd /usr/share/kernel-package/ruleset/arches > $ sudo patch -p0 < patch_name > or > $ sudo patch -p1 < patch_name > > " > I dont have a "/usr/share/kernel-package/ruleset/arches" dir... and I > don't know what "patch_name" refers to. > The path: For my 64 Studio it's provided by the package "kernel-package" version 11.001 (hardy) Because of "patch_name" see above, it's a dummy, a wildcard for any name you like to give the patch. > ANy advice? > > Thanks > Rick Hth, Ralf _______________________________________________ 64studio-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.64studio.com/mailman/listinfo/64studio-users
