Thank you so much Bernd and Ranjan, i should read Documentation more often
:)


~amit

On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 10:30 PM, Bernd Petrovitsch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> On Wed, 2008-09-24 at 19:29 +0530, amit mehta wrote:
> [...]
> > I'm trying to build linux kernel for version 2.6.24 on a machine
> > running suse.
> > so i downloaded the kernel soruces and patches from :
> > ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v2.6/
> >
> > I've downloaded following two compressed files:
> > linux-2.6.24.tar.bz2
> > patch-2.6.24.bz2
> >
> > After uncompressing and making symlink as
> > ln -s /usr/src/linux-2.6.24 /usr/src/linux
> >
> > I gave a dry run for patches as:
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] ] cd /usr/src/linux
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] /usr/src/linux ] # bzip2 -dc /usr/src/patch-2.6.24.bz2 |
> > patch -p1 --dry-run
>
> In principle, that is the way to go.
>
> > patching file .gitignore
> > Reversed (or previously applied) patch detected!  Assume -R? [n]
> >
> > Seems that it found already applied patches, so what should i provide
>
> You shouldn't apply patch-2.6.24 on to linux-2.6.24 in the first place
> as all of them are already in there.
> If you apply patch-2.6.24 on linux-2.6.23, you actually get
> linux-2.6.24.
>
> >  as answer to
> > the above querry(Assume -R? [n] ) , i gave "Y" as answer and then
>
> You do realize what you get with that?
>
> >  again there was
> > similar question for several other files . so is there any way to be
> > able to overwrite the already applied
> > patches non interactively(i mean without answering the same question
> > for other files as well) ?
>
> You could pass "-R" as parameter to patch. But that merely
> reverse-applies (i.e. "removes") the patch (and in the above example
> would produce linux-2.6.23).
>
>        Bernd
> --
> Firmix Software GmbH                   http://www.firmix.at/
> mobil: +43 664 4416156                 fax: +43 1 7890849-55
>          Embedded Linux Development and Services
>
>
>


-- 
"Everyone has a photographic memory. Some people just don't have film."

— Mel Brooks

Reply via email to