Linux-Development-Sys Digest #627, Volume #7 Fri, 25 Feb 00 23:13:20 EST
Contents:
Upgrading very old kernal. (Colin)
bzImage and zImage error (GriffD2000)
Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking? (Miquel van
Smoorenburg)
Re: TCP/IP socket from kernel (Warren Young)
Re: Debugging application using pthread (Mark Clayton)
Re: help the GDB problem (Mark Clayton)
Re: 2.2.x SMP and DK440LX issues ("D. Stimits")
Build your own Linux OS (Michael Ransburg)
Re: Build your own Linux OS (Tom Leete)
Re: 2.2.x SMP and DK440LX issues (Dmitri A. Sergatskov)
Re: Want to work with OSS for a living? (MA) (Jim Richardson)
Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking? (Christopher Browne)
Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking? (Christopher Browne)
Re: Looking for a decent development environment (Laurent Debain)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Colin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Upgrading very old kernal.
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 00:30:06 GMT
I have a computer running Caldera Lite v1.0
with a Red Hat kernal v1.2.13. I got this off a cd from a book, and i know
that the CD is Copyright 1996. I am wondering if There is somewhere where
I can bring this more up to date, and if there is, how much space will it
take?
--
Posted via CNET Help.com
http://www.help.com/
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (GriffD2000)
Subject: bzImage and zImage error
Date: 26 Feb 2000 00:39:07 GMT
I have kernel 2.2.14 and when doing a "make zImage" or "make bzImage" i run
into the following problem. Skipping most of the messages, i come to this:
make[1]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux-2.0.35/arch/i386/lib'
make all_targets
make[2]: Entering directory `/usr/src/linux-2.0.35/arch/i386/lib'
gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/linux-2.0.35/include -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -O2
-fomit-frame-pointer -pipe -fno-strength-reduce -m486 -DCPU=486 -c -o
checksum.o checksum.c
make[2]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.0.35/arch/i386/lib'
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.0.35/arch/i386/lib'
checksum.c:200: redefinition of 'csum_partial_copy'
checksum.c:105: 'csum_partial_copy' previously defined here
{standard input}: Assembler messages:
{standard input}:185: Fatal error: Symbol csum_partial_copy already defined
make[2]: *** [checksum.o] Error 1
make[2]: Leaving directory 'usr/src/linux-2.0.35/arch/i386/lib'
make[1]: *** [first_rule] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory 'usr/src/linux-2.0.35/arch/i386/lib'
make: *** [dir_arch/i386/lib] Error 2
Before this, I did a make dep, clean, and before that even a mrproper. Does
anyone know what is causing this problem, and how can i fix it?
Thanx
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Miquel van Smoorenburg)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking?
Date: 26 Feb 2000 00:46:26 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Adam Ierymenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>True enough, but as an end user of both NT and Linux I can
>say that I encounter library problems more under Linux than
>NT. Of course, when I *do* encounter them under NT they
>are much more serious and often require a lot of work to fix.
I have never ever seen any library problems. Using libc5, glibc 2.0
and glibc 2.1 binaries and god knows how many other libs.
Ofcourse Debian _is_ the technically superiour distribution ;)
Mike.
--
"dhbgr zr ba guvf bar - biretnna bc Rkpunatr vf rra jvwf orfyhvg" -- ZnepbU.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 17:49:54 -0700
From: Warren Young <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: TCP/IP socket from kernel
Sake wrote:
>
> What is the "right" way to use TCP/IP socket functions in a driver/module ?
> I try to write a module that serves requests from TCP.
The "right" way is to write a user-space process to handle TCP/IP
interaction, and let the driver handle the stuff that the user-space
process isn't allowed to. The driver and the user-space process
communicate with each other to break the functionality up. Example:
kernel module ppp.o versus user-space program pppd.
--
= Warren -- ICBM Address: 36.8274040 N, 108.0204086 W, alt. 1714m
------------------------------
From: Mark Clayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Debugging application using pthread
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.development.apps
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 20:14:46 -0500
On Wed, 23 Feb 2000, Fabrice Peix wrote:
>Ralf Render wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> does anybody know how to debug applications after calling
>> pthread_create()?
>> My problem is that after calling pthread_create() the debugger (kdebg,
>> gdb) displays the message: "Program received signal ?, Unknown signal".
>> After that no further debugging is possible.
>> Maybe the reasons are the new PIDs created by the pthread library.
>> Who knows can help?
>>
>> Thanks Ralf.
> Yop,
>
>You must take a patch for libc and gdb to support thread debuging or
>install a recent distrib.
Actually a recent distro might not be the answer. The Mandrake I have
here has gdb 4.18, but still does not debug threaded apps. I patched
a copy of 4.17 which does work. Anyone know of a patch for 4.18 or know
why 4.18 doesn't work?
Mark Clayton
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
------------------------------
From: Mark Clayton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: help the GDB problem
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 20:19:52 -0500
When you compiled your app, did you specify the -g option?
What about when you linked?
Mark
On Tue, 22 Feb 2000, lewis wrote:
>my GDB can't see my source code,
>
>so can't do the step tracing,
>
>even use "dir" to add the directory cat't do that ether.
>
>please help me!!
>
>john,,
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 18:15:50 -0700
From: "D. Stimits" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: 2.2.x SMP and DK440LX issues
"Dmitri A. Sergatskov" wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I updated multiple dual-CPU computers to RedHat 6.1 and recently
> noticed that the computer built around Intel DK440LX (2X 333 MHz P-II)
> motherboard has some "problem" in SMP mode. All benchmarks I tried
> (MATLAB bench() or custom compiled Fortran code) are running
If the program isn't written with threads to take advantage of SMP, it
won't run any faster. If the operations being run cannot be run
concurrently, i.e., one must complete before the other starts, it
won't help. If there is overhead from dual cpu support when dual cpu
isn't being helpful, it will run slower. I propose you do this test:
run two completely separate instances of matlab at the same time,
doing the exact same program. Compare the overall times for two
instances when running SMP versus not.
And if you are swapping out at all, and have insufficient ram to do a
lot of caching, you will lose an extreme amount of advantage of dual
cpu. In the time it takes to swap out, you've lost a very large amount
of work that a 2nd cpu has been starved for. If you can't take maximum
advantage of caching (even if not swapping), you are still starving
pipelines. So if you are already low on ram, ignore the above tests
until you can get more ram.
> significantly (almost twice, but varies) slower in SMP mode than in UP
> mode. In UP mode the numbers are the same as with similar system built
> on 440BX motherboard (also 2X333Mhz) and the same as they used to be
> with RedHat 5.2 (and earlier) and 2.0.x kernels.
>
> The simplest "benchmark" I tried is the following trivial loop:
>
> double precision x,y,z,sum
> integer i,j,k
> sum = 0.0d0
> do i = 1, 1000
> do j = 1, 1000
> do k = 1, 100
> sum = sum + real(i)*real(j)/real(k)
> end do
> end do
> end do
> write (6,*) sum
> end
>
> On LX machine 'time -v' gives: 11.5 sec. user, 5.5 sec. system (18 elapsed)
> and approx 100 page faults (in case it matters), on BX the same binary
> would result in: 11.5 sec. user, 0.1 sec system (11.5 elapsed)and also
> 100 page faults.
> The difference is even worse for memory intensive code.
>
> If I boot LX machine into SMP mode but with 'noapic' kernel argument it
> runs the code as well as BX (but PCI would not work).
>
> I tried 2.2.12 (stock RH6.1 and custom compiled) and 2.2.15(from RH6.2beta)
> with identical results.
> I do not no if I can easily run 2.0.x kernel on RH6.1 but I will try.
>
> I do not see any error messages in /var/log/messages or elsewhere.
> Bogomips or OK (cat
>
> All suggestions and advises would be greatly appreciated.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Dmitri.
>
> p.s.:
>
> Both computers have 512MB SDRAM and essentially identical CPUs.
>
> cat /proc/cpuinfo
> processor : 0
> vendor_id : GenuineIntel
> cpu family : 6
> model : 5
> model name : Pentium II (Deschutes)
> stepping : 0
> cpu MHz : 333.061631
> cache size : 512 KB
> fdiv_bug : no
> hlt_bug : no
> sep_bug : no
> f00f_bug : no
> coma_bug : no
> fpu : yes
> fpu_exception : yes
> cpuid level : 2
> wp : yes
> flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge
> mca cmov pat pse36 mmx fxsr
> bogomips : 332.60
>
> processor : 1
> vendor_id : GenuineIntel
> cpu family : 6
> model : 5
> model name : Pentium II (Deschutes)
> stepping : 0
> cpu MHz : 333.061631
> cache size : 512 KB
> fdiv_bug : no
> hlt_bug : no
> sep_bug : no
> f00f_bug : no
> coma_bug : no
> fpu : yes
> fpu_exception : yes
> cpuid level : 2
> wp : yes
> flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr pae mce cx8 apic sep mtrr pge
> mca cmov pat pse36 mmx fxsr
> bogomips : 332.60
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Michael Ransburg)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Build your own Linux OS
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 01:30:26 GMT
Is there a HOWTO or any other sort of documentaion on how to build your
own Linux System? I suppose that I'm not the first one interested in
this, so I guess there should be some documentation to get me started.
I suppose it would be easiest to have a running linux distribution with
all the necessary tools to compile the necessary libraries (and the
kernel of course) to get a minimal bootable partition.
Well, I know it's much work and I don't want to start from one of the
existing mini distributions. Any references to HOWTO's, books, or any
other sort of documentation about this topic will be highly appreciated
:)
thanks
mike
--
Curious? Look at http://www.tux.org/~daneel/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 21:21:14 -0500
From: Tom Leete <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.setup
Subject: Re: Build your own Linux OS
Michael Ransburg wrote:
>
> Is there a HOWTO or any other sort of documentaion on how to build your
> own Linux System? I suppose that I'm not the first one interested in
> this, so I guess there should be some documentation to get me started.
>
> I suppose it would be easiest to have a running linux distribution with
> all the necessary tools to compile the necessary libraries (and the
> kernel of course) to get a minimal bootable partition.
>
Bootdisk-HOWTO covers the necessities.
Tom
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dmitri A. Sergatskov)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.hardware
Subject: Re: 2.2.x SMP and DK440LX issues
Date: 26 Feb 2000 02:41:10 GMT
On Fri, 25 Feb 2000 18:15:50 -0700, D. Stimits <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>"Dmitri A. Sergatskov" wrote:
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I updated multiple dual-CPU computers to RedHat 6.1 and recently
>> noticed that the computer built around Intel DK440LX (2X 333 MHz P-II)
>> motherboard has some "problem" in SMP mode. All benchmarks I tried
>> (MATLAB bench() or custom compiled Fortran code) are running
>
>If the program isn't written with threads to take advantage of SMP, it
>won't run any faster. If the operations being run cannot be run
You have not read what I wrote. So I will try again.
I have multiple SMP computers all running RH6.1
One of them with DK440LX motherboard run simple executable
(which does not attempt to use multiple CPUs) significantly slower
then others (with the same clock/CPUs).
If I reboot it to uniprocessor mode then it runs fast.
Computer has 512Meg of RAM and the test program I posted probably
fits entirely in L1 cache.
The problem showed up after upgrading from RH5.2(2.0.36 kernel) to
RH 6.1 (2.2.x kernels).
.....some irrelevant recollections on SMP systems are deleted......
Sincerely,
Dmitri.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Jim Richardson)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.linux.development.apps
Subject: Re: Want to work with OSS for a living? (MA)
Date: Fri, 25 Feb 2000 19:22:48 -0800
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Fri, 25 Feb 2000 02:22:04 -0500,
Greystoke, in the persona of <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
brought forth the following words...:
<snipped post to focus on sig>
>
>#!/usr/bin/perl
>@a=(Lbzjoftt,Inqbujfodf, Hvcsjt); $b="Lbssz Wbmm" ; $b =~ y/b-z/a-z/ ; $c = " Tif ".
>@a ." hsfbu wj" ."suvft pg b qsphsbnnfs" . ":\n"; $c =~y/b-y/a-z/; print"\n\n$c ";
>for($i=0; $i<@a; $i++) { $a[$i] =~ y/b-y/a-z/; if($a[$i]eq$a [-1]) {print"and
>$a[$i]." ; }else{ print"$a[$i], "; }}print"\n\t\t--$b\n\n";
>
This sig is diabolical :)
--
Jim Richardson
Anarchist, pagan and proud of it
WWW.eskimo.com/~warlock
Linux, because life's too short for a buggy OS.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy
Subject: Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 03:44:46 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Mario Klebsch would nsay:
>Albert Ulmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>Mario Klebsch wrote:
>>> Well, that probably would be Debian GNU/Linux, and there is RatHad,
>>> SUSE, Caldera,... They all claim to be Linux, but in fact are
>>> different OSes.
>
>>Nonsense, they all cater the diverse needs of various users. In my view
>>that's the main point about the whole open source movement: CHOICE! It
>>is good to be different!
>
>But not the ABI! A common ABI is required to have binary
>distributions. One can argue about them, and I always prefer a source
>duistribution, but binary distributions are there and they are making
>trouble, unnessesary trouble, if there would be a well defined ABI.
The problem is that the only ABI that there is a reasonable
*convention* for is C, and that's only "convention," not "standard."
The nearest thing to an ABI is the ELF binary format, and it only
covers some pieces of what would be needed in an ABI.
There is no standard ABI for other languages unless you go all the way
to building components using CORBA, and *that* pretty much mandates
that each component be a full-fledged executable of some sort.
For instance, there is *NO* common ABI for C++, and not on any
platform. [That is one place where a recent Q&A on Slashdot with
Bjarne Stroustrup saw him getting "defensive."]
This is almost certainly why:
a) There's not a whole lot of C++ apps deployed as part of Linux
distributions;
b) C++ applications tend to appear "bloated." In the absence of an
ABI, in order to run apps outside of the *precise* environment in
which they were compiled, you have to statically link in what
libraries can't be guaranteed to be ubiquitous. [Which may amount
to "all of them."]
On the other hand,
c) The only way to *safely* get *efficient* C++ applications into
place is to compile them in the system in which they are to run.
That's certainly an argument in favor of "open source."
--
"Now, if someone proposed using people who spam comp.sys.* groups with
political screeds in place of lab rats for drug testing, I'd
wholeheartedly concur". -- John C. Randolph
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/lsf.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Christopher Browne)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.advocacy,gnu.misc.discuss
Subject: Re: Binary compatibility: what kind of crack are they smoking?
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 03:45:07 GMT
Centuries ago, Nostradamus foresaw a time when Mario Klebsch would say:
>Albert Ulmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
>>Mario Klebsch wrote:
>>> >If your talking about an operating system,
>>> >you should be calling it GNU/Linux, like i.e. Debian does.
>>
>>> Well, that probably would be Debian GNU/Linux, and there is RatHad,
>>> SUSE, Caldera,... They all claim to be Linux, but in fact are
>>> different OSes.
>
>>Nonsense, they all cater the diverse needs of various users. In my view
>>that's the main point about the whole open source movement: CHOICE! It
>>is good to be different!
>
>The absence of the ABI destroys the choice. If you are not running
>RedHat or SUSE Linux, you really are in trouble, today. However, the
>degree of trouble varies from distribution to distribution.
No, the absence of ABI discourages the widespread deployment of
applications in binary form, and encourages the notion of recompiling
applications from source for particular targets.
>From an FSF standpoint, that is actually a *GOOD* thing, as it
represents both:
- Discouragement of the use of proprietary, no source,
applications, and
- Encouragement to recompile applications *from* source, thus
encouraging proliferation of understanding of the sources.
The position of both Debian and the Many BSDs is that it is necessary
to have, as the basis, source code, which can then be redeployed as
needed.
Thus, it is far more accurate to say:
"If you are *using binary RPMs,* and are not running Red Hat Linux or
SuSE Linux, you're in trouble today."
>If we want to keep the choice, we'd better create a well defined ABI
>yesterday!
The Linux kernel shows off the dilemna fairly nicely: If you create a
well-defined ABI, this:
a) Encourages the production of proprietary device drivers
b) Encourages people to depend on the ABI, which prevents people from
making improvements to the kernel that might break the "permanent
ABI."
--
"I'm not sure it is of as much general concern as, say, coke-machines."
-- Marvin Minsky (out of context), on the subject of death.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] <http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/linuxkernel.html>
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Laurent Debain)
Subject: Re: Looking for a decent development environment
Date: Sat, 26 Feb 2000 03:45:36 GMT
Lord Petrosky wrote:
>err, how about in english now? seriously, i have gotten over the beginner's
>hump with Linux and am presently getting deeper into Samba and Apache. i
>want to program mainly for the web as well as get into some (non web)
>network programming. do you know how to start? throwing out acronyms
>doesn't really help; i am looking for maybe a site or a downloadable package
>that explains things in a logical manner.
>
>thanks anyways for your reply,
>
>LP
>
>
>>
>> >i'm getting into some programming (C, Perl, Java maybe) and i figure
>there
>> >must be certain "environments" with integrated "tools" that make the job
>> >interesting.
>>
>> Yup. It's called "Unix". There are hundreds of tools ranging
>> from grep to gdb to ctags to Emacs. Most of the tools can be
>> hooked to gether using pipes, and automated using
>> shell-scripts.
>>
>> --
>> Grant Edwards
>
Hello,
You are looking for some sort of IDE, right ? Well, once you are running
a unix shell, be it bourne/ksh/csh or bash, you have exactly that. From
its very inception onwards, unix has been conceived as a system for
program development. Grant's reply gave you the essence of its
philosophy.
There are a few good books on the subject, it seems[1]. My advise would
be to go for the "classics" instead of the latest fads. Even when the
former seem a little outdated, they usually capture the general concepts
much better. Read your system's manual pages instead for the actual
usage details of programs/system calls/library calls. Start with a few
tools and learn to use them well: a real editor � la emacs or vi, find,
sed & awk, make,... Use regular expressions regularly. Watch
"experienced" people and question you own preconceptions once in a
while; the system, while not without its flaws, has been used by
generations of programmers, not all of them idiots. Browse around
("man -k <foo>"). Read even more manual pages. Be creative.
Yes, all of it is pretty much text based. You will probably curse it. A
lot. Yet eventually come enlightenment and proficiency and you will find
yourself mastering something which is amazingly extensible and beats the
shit out of any graphical IDE i have seen so far. (amen) Did i mention
it is often fun too ?
In my experience, the GNU incarnations of the many unix tools, as found
on GNU/Linux systems, are usually quite potent compared to their
counterparts from commercial vendors, so you have an edge here.
You do not have to take anyone's word for any of the above, of course.
Do yourself a favour, though; give it a decent try.
cheers,
laurent
[1] "The Unix Programming Environment", by Brian Kernighan and Rob Pike,
is definitely among the highly regarded ones
(http://netlib.bell-labs.com/cm/cs/upe/index.html). Richard Stevens'
work is a must if you intend to do a lot of network programming
(http://www.kohala.com/start/#books).
Have a look at the many annotated bibliographies for more suggestions.
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.development.system) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Development-System Digest
******************************
