>-----Original Message-----
>From: Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]>
>To: BLFS Support List <[email protected]>
>Sent: Mon, Oct 18, 2010 10:59 pm
>Subject: Re: cat /proc/version reports wrong info.

>Nathan Coulson wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 18, 2010 at 2:36 PM,  <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]>
>>> To: BLFS Support List <[email protected]>
>>> Sent: Mon, Oct 18, 2010 5:16 pm
>>> Subject: Re: cat /proc/version reports wrong info.
>>> [email protected] wrote:
>>> Hi
>>>
>>> I've recently installed LFS6.7 using jhalfs.  No probs.  Building
>> BLFS
>>> now to own requirements,but I've discovered a problem with
>>> /proc/version reporting wrong gcc version and compiled kernel.
>>>
>>> LFS 6.7 uses kernel 2.6.35.4
>>>
>>> 'cat /proc/version' gives:
>>>
>>> Linux version 2.6.27.10 (r...@cliffhanger) (gcc version 4.2.3) #1
>>> PREEMPT Sun Jan 3 19:49:10 GMT 2010
>>>
>>> 'uname -r' gives:
>>>
>>> 2.6.27.10
>>>
>>> AFAIK 'uname' reads its info from /lib/modules/RELEASE, which is
>>> 2.6.35.4
>>> /proc/version is compiled into the kernel.  It sounds like
>>> you booted the wrong kernel.
>>  Thanks Bruce, but definitely not.   I have two partitions, with the
>> host(an older LFS)on one and LFS6.7 on the other.  LFS6.7
>> is booting the new kernel(2.6.35.4), but proc/version and uname both
>> report it as the older kernel, 2.6.27.10.
>>
>> Have just reinstalled kernel to be sure, still reporting it wrongly.
>>
>>> LFS does not install a /lib/modules/RELEASE file.  I've not heard of
>>> that before.
>> When I say RELEASE I mean the kernel version, i.e.
>> /lib/modules/2.6.35.4.   This is what 'uname' reads?
>>
>> thanks
>>
>> MAC
>

>Right.  See 'man 2 uname'

>"This is a system call, and the operating system presumably knows  its
>name,  release and  version.  It also knows what hardware it runs on."

>Actually it uses the uname call to figure out which modules to use,
not
>the other way around.

>linux-fan wrote:

> You wil see a line such as:
> lfs kernel: Inspecting /boot/System.map-2.6.33
>
> ... and that 2.6.33 is the kernel version that booted.
> Assuming that you named System.map-($uname -r)

> nope, it is read right from the kernel's version string.  Only way to
> get that, is by running that version of kernel.

Which I am

I know I'm booting the 2.6.35.4 kernel, but it's not being reported as
such.   This is affecting the module loading on the new system e.g.

modprobe: FATAL: Could not load /lib/modules/2.6.27.10/modules.dep: No
such file or directory - again the wrong kernel

Surely the big question, is how, on a brand new system with its first
kernel, did the listing in /proc/version get to be 2.6.27.10?  I can go
to it and see this.   It seems to have inherited the kernel version
  from the old lfs host system i used.  But how?  As I said I used 
jhalfs
for the install, but was forced to install the new kernel manually.
How do i change this proc file - I know by booting the correct kernel!!
 This is crazy

thanks to all

MAC






-- 
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page

Reply via email to