On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 5:56 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >>-----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 >
/proc/sys/kernel/* - osrelease, ostype & version - this is actually the kernel structures you are reading. Look at version and it will tell you when it was built. osrelease will tell you the version number. -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
