On Saturday 14 June 2003 11:24 am, Net Llama! wrote:On 06/14/03 08:08, Bruce Marshall wrote: > On Saturday 14 June 2003 10:55 am, Net Llama! wrote: >> On 06/14/03 07:43, Kurt Wall wrote: >> >> Maybe it's not cooked yet. >> > >> > The patch didn�t apply cleanly to stock 2.4.21 sources, so I >> > didn�t even bother trying to compile it. There were a dozen or so >> > rejects and way to much fuzz... >> >> huh? the only discrepancy that i got was: >> patching file linux/drivers/block/ll_rw_blk.c >> Hunk #1 succeeded at 1193 (offset 7 lines). >> patching file linux/drivers/md/raid5.c >> >> >> other than that it was smooth sailing. > > I didn't even get that error.
hrmmmm...are you using a full 2.4.21 tarball, or just the patchset tarball? I'm using the full tarball, downloaded early yesterday morning. i'm starting to wonder if what got dumped out to the world was changed at some point.
Using a full tarball.
that throws my theory out. so, can anyone explain what the new option 'PGE extensions' is under 'processor type & features'? it looks to be something useful on pentium compatibles for high memory support, but i can't find a good explanation that doesn't require me to have a degree in hardware engineering.
-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ L. Friedman [EMAIL PROTECTED] Linux Step-by-step & TyGeMo: http://netllama.ipfox.com
9:10am up 14 days, 17:24, 1 user, load average: 0.86, 0.75, 0.68
_______________________________________________ Linux-users mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Unsubscribe/Suspend/Etc -> http://www.linux-sxs.org/mailman/listinfo/linux-users
