Re: Kernel 2.0.31 won't compile
On 3 Aug 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote: in make menuconfig, turn off anythig you do not need immediately, like any unknown drivers. (look at makefiles and .config to know what to turn off). I too have a hinote vp 575 laptop and a Xircom ehternet/modem card, but I have not yet loaded Linux on the laptop -- I'sd appreciate it if you would keep me posted. I finally got 2.0.31 to compile --- and that was achieved by deconfiguring a whole stack of drivers. I still don't know why I couldn't compile it with these drivers, but fortunately I didn't need any of them. I think you said before that the kernel source tree should be self sufficient---providing its own headers. What about things like stdio.h etc? Because I think these were the things letting down the side. When I finally did get 2.0.31 to compile - sure enough the Zircom ethernet/modem worked fine. I wondered however whether the problem with getting the Zircom card to work wasn't so much the kernel version, but something to do with these other drivers. I tried compiling 2.0.32 with all the unnecessary drivers deconfigured and sure enough, the Zircom card worked for this kernel too! (Whereas for the out-of-the-box debian 2.0.32 kernel it doesn't work.) I can't see why deconfiguring these extra drivers should make any difference, but it obviously does! Thanks again for your help, and for your info on /usr/include/asm symlinks and the like. Cheers, Mark. __ _\/___\__/___Mark_Phillips___/ \__/_\__/--\__/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ \__/HE___\__/--APTAIN/ \__/_\__/--\__/__/ /__To be is to do.__I. Kant___/ \__/__\__/___/ /__To do is to be.__A. Sartre_/ /__I am.God___/ /__Jesus did.___/ -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Kernel 2.0.31 won't compile
On 3 Aug 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Mark The links I created were: SNIP I compile kernels in /usr/local all the time, and I never have created any of these links ... they are not required. I made the links because that's what the README file for the linux kernel says to do. As you see: - make sure your /usr/include/asm, /usr/include/linux, and /usr/include/scsi directories are just symlinks to the kernel sources: cd /usr/include rm -rf asm linux scsi ln -s /usr/src/linux/include/asm-i386 asm ln -s /usr/src/linux/include/linux linux ln -s /usr/src/linux/include/scsi scsi I had thought that I should follow the instructions in the kernel README, but perhaps the README is just over cautious?? I notice that in Debian, these directories seem to be provided by the libc6-dev package. Are you saying that providing libc6-dev is kept reasonably uptodate, these links are not necessary? Cheers, Mark. __ _\/___\__/___Mark_Phillips___/ \__/_\__/--\__/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ \__/HE___\__/--APTAIN/ \__/_\__/--\__/__/ /__To be is to do.__I. Kant___/ \__/__\__/___/ /__To do is to be.__A. Sartre_/ /__I am.God___/ /__Jesus did.___/ -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Kernel 2.0.31 won't compile
Hi,
I think it is time for my canned posting about how kernel
header files are handled by Debian.
manoj
$Id: README.headers,v 1.7 1998/07/14 21:18:38 srivasta Exp $
This is the Debian GNU/Linux prepackaged version of the Linux kernel
headers. Linux was written by Linus Torvalds
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and others.
This package was put together by Simon Shapiro [EMAIL PROTECTED], from
sources retrieved from directories under
ftp.cs.helsinki.fi:/pub/Software/Linux/Kernel/
This package contains the Linux kernel header files.
Kernel Headers and libc6-dev package
Need for kernel include files
=== == === =
Even though GNU libc 2.0 (a.k.a. libc6) provides an uniform
interface to C programmers, one should realize that it needs
different underpinnings on different architectures and operating
systems (remember, glibc2 is multi-OS).
glibc provides all the standard files that the C standard and
POSIX require, and those in turn call in OS and platform specific
headers as required transparently to the user. There is an a complete
divorce of the kernel-level interface from the user-level interface:
the application programmer does not need to know kernel level details
at all.
But this has been taken by some to mean that
/usr/include/{linux,asm} would be superfluous, which is a technical
impossibility given that glibc2 is not an architecture and OS
specific library.
I do not believe it is easy for glibc to present an interface
that does not match the underlying OS, and quite possibly people just
punted. If there is a mismatch between the user level structures and
the kernel level structures, then libc6 library shall have to install
translating wrappers around system calls (not such a great idea for
high performance systems). I can foresee cases where it would not be
possible to implement these wrappers, given a sufficiently large set
of architectures and OS's.
In the case of Linux, the kernel header files are the
underpinnings of the architecture independent interface.
Take a simple general ANSI C include file like errno.h. This
in turn includes /usr/include/errnos.h, which includes
/usr/include/linux/errno.h, which in turn includes
/usr/include/asm/errno.h. See? A simple, standard include file like
errno.h, and one needs kernel include files for that.
Traditional two symlink approach
=== === ===
Under libc5, it was standard for part of the user interface to
libc to be exported from the kernel includes, via /usr/include/linux
and /usr/include/asm. Traditionally, this was done by linking those
two directories to the appropriate directories in
/usr/src/linux/include. This is the method documented in the install
instructions for the kernel sources, even today.
Why that is bad
=== == ===
Kernel headers no longer make sense exporting to user space
(in early days of Linux, that was not true). It is beginning to get
harder to synchronize the libc and the kernel headers as in the old
days; now linking with the latest kernel headers may subtly break new
code since the headers linked with are different from the compiled
library. In addition, the specter of programs breaking with new
kernel headers was preventing needed new features from being added to
the kernel (and damping innovative experimentation in kernel
development) (see appendix A for details).
Besides, the kernel itself no longer needs /usr/include/linux/*
at all, so keeping the libc and kernel headers the same aren't
needed for kernel development.
The headers were included in Debian's libc5-dev after a rash
of very buggy alpha kernel releases (1.3.7* or something like that)
that proceeded to break compilations, etc. Kernel versions are
changed far more rapidly than libc is, and there are higher chances
that people install a custom kernel than they install custom libc.
Add to that the fact that few programs really need the more
volatile elements of the header files (that is, things that really
change from kernel version to kernel version), [before you reject
this, consider: programs compiled on one kernel version usually work
on other kernels]. For the few that do need specific kernel headers,
use -I/usr/src/kernel-headers-version or some thing for a specific
kernel version, or -I/usr/src/linux/include for the latest set of
headers installed..
Most programs, even if they include linux/something.h, do
not really depend on the version of the kernel, as long as the kernel
versions are not too far off, they will work. And the headers
provided in libc5-dev (and
Kernel 2.0.31 won't compile
Hi, I need to compile the 2.0.31 kernel. Unfortunately there is not a debian package for the 2.0.31 kernel, so I downloaded the upstream version, unpacked it into /usr/local/src, created links and followed the instructions for make-kpkg in order to make a kernel image package. Unfortunately it didn't compile, coming up with compile errors such as /usr/include/sys/types.h:45: conflicting types for `mode_t' /usr/local/src/linux-2.0.31/include/linux/types.h:12: previous declaration of `mode_t' /usr/include/time.h:66: warning: redefinition of `clock_t' /usr/local/src/linux-2.0.31/include/linux/types.h:50: warning: `clock_t' previously declared here There are a number of such error messages. I don't know what to do here! Can anyone help? Thanks, Mark. __ _\/___\__/___Mark_Phillips___/ \__/_\__/--\__/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ \__/HE___\__/--APTAIN/ \__/_\__/--\__/__/ /__To be is to do.__I. Kant___/ \__/__\__/___/ /__To do is to be.__A. Sartre_/ /__I am.God___/ /__Jesus did.___/ -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Kernel 2.0.31 won't compile
Hi, Mark == Mark Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mark I need to compile the 2.0.31 kernel. Unfortunately there is Mark not a debian package for the 2.0.31 kernel, so I downloaded the Mark upstream version, unpacked it into /usr/local/src, created Mark links What links did you create? Please uncreate those links and try again, I fear that may be part of the problem. Mark and followed the instructions for make-kpkg in order to Mark make a kernel image package. Unfortunately it didn't compile, Mark coming up with compile errors such as Mark /usr/include/sys/types.h:45: conflicting types for `mode_t' Mark /usr/local/src/linux-2.0.31/include/linux/types.h:12: previous declaration Mark of `mode_t' Something is seriously wrong here. The kernel is supposed to be a self contained syste; it shpuld not be linking with any header files outside of the kernel source tree. manoj -- Natural selection won't matter soon, not anywhere as much as conscious selection. We will civilize and alter ourselves to suit our ideas of what we can be. Within one more human lifespan, we will have changed ourselves unrecognizably. Greg Bear Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/ Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Kernel 2.0.31 won't compile
On 3 Aug 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Mark I need to compile the 2.0.31 kernel. Unfortunately there is Mark not a debian package for the 2.0.31 kernel, so I downloaded the Mark upstream version, unpacked it into /usr/local/src, created Mark links What links did you create? Please uncreate those links and try again, I fear that may be part of the problem. The links I created were: cd /usr/include mv asm asm.old mv linux linux.old mv scsi scsi.old ln -s /usr/local/src/linux-2.0.31/include/asm-i386 asm ln -s /usr/local/src/linux-2.0.31/include/linux linux ln -s /usr/local/src/linux-2.0.31/include/scsi scsi as well as cd /usr/src ln -s /usr/local/src/linux-2.0.31 linux I have also tried using make-kpkg without using the first three links above (ie using the existing directories) and in both cases I get the same compile errors. I have tried unmaking and making these links again and following again your instructions in /usr/doc/kernel-package/README.gz but I still get the same problems. Mark and followed the instructions for make-kpkg in order to Mark make a kernel image package. Unfortunately it didn't compile, Mark coming up with compile errors such as Mark /usr/include/sys/types.h:45: conflicting types for `mode_t' Mark /usr/local/src/linux-2.0.31/include/linux/types.h:12: previous declaration Mark of `mode_t' Something is seriously wrong here. The kernel is supposed to be a self contained syste; it shpuld not be linking with any header files outside of the kernel source tree. I agree it seems seriously wrong. It seems to be linking with header files provided by libc6-dev (that's where /usr/include/sys/types.h comes from). I am at a loss to know what to try next. I imagine gcc would only look in a place like /usr/include/sys/types.h if it believed the types.h file could not be found in the kernel source tree. (I am guessing that libc6-dev sets up /usr/include/sys as a default location to look for things??) But I notice there are many types.h files in the kernel source tree, so what's going on? Mark. __ _\/___\__/___Mark_Phillips___/ \__/_\__/--\__/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ \__/HE___\__/--APTAIN/ \__/_\__/--\__/__/ /__To be is to do.__I. Kant___/ \__/__\__/___/ /__To do is to be.__A. Sartre_/ /__I am.God___/ /__Jesus did.___/ -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Kernel 2.0.31 won't compile
On 3 Aug 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Mark == Mark Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mark /usr/include/sys/types.h:45: conflicting types for `mode_t' Mark /usr/local/src/linux-2.0.31/include/linux/types.h:12: previous declaration Mark of `mode_t' Something is seriously wrong here. The kernel is supposed to be a self contained syste; it shpuld not be linking with any header files outside of the kernel source tree. I should add that the file /usr/include/sys/types.h, according to the error output, is included from /usr/include/stdlib.h which in turn is included from scc.c. Perhaps there is a bug in scc.c --- I think I'll try and exclude this option from the .config file --- if I can work out which option it is (any clues?) Cheers, Mark. __ _\/___\__/___Mark_Phillips___/ \__/_\__/--\__/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ \__/HE___\__/--APTAIN/ \__/_\__/--\__/__/ /__To be is to do.__I. Kant___/ \__/__\__/___/ /__To do is to be.__A. Sartre_/ /__I am.God___/ /__Jesus did.___/ -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Kernel 2.0.31 won't compile
Hi, Mark == Mark Phillips [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Mark On 3 Aug 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Mark I need to compile the 2.0.31 kernel. Unfortunately there is Mark not a debian package for the 2.0.31 kernel, so I downloaded the Mark upstream version, unpacked it into /usr/local/src, created Mark links What links did you create? Please uncreate those links and try again, I fear that may be part of the problem. Mark The links I created were: SNIP I compile kernels in /usr/local all the time, and I never have created any of these links ... they are not required. Mark I am at a loss to know what to try next. Me too. I can only tell you what works for me, which is: I unpack kernel sources in /usr/local/src/kernel; I ignore the bit about symlinks, and I use make-kpkg; but it has been a while since I tried 2.0.31 (if I ever did); is there areason you can't just go to 2.0.3[45]? manoj -- ...cyberpunk wants to see the mind as mechanistic duplicable, challenging basic assumptions about the nature of individuality self. That seems all the better reason to assume that cyberpunk art music is essentially mindless garbagio. Willy certainly addressed this idea in Count Zero, with Katatonenkunst, the automatic box-maker and the girl's observation that the real art was the building of the machine itself, rather than its output. Eliot Handelman Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/ Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Kernel 2.0.31 won't compile
On 3 Aug 1998, Manoj Srivastava wrote: Mark I am at a loss to know what to try next. Me too. I can only tell you what works for me, which is: I unpack kernel sources in /usr/local/src/kernel; I ignore the bit about symlinks, and I use make-kpkg; but it has been a while since I tried 2.0.31 (if I ever did); is there areason you can't just go to 2.0.3[45]? Yes. I'm actually trying to get a Xircom ethernet/modem PCMCIA card to configure properly on a digital laptop. I have been in contact with another guy with exactly the same laptop who has got it working using RedHat. We can't find anything wrong with what I am doing. The only possibility is that he is using version 2.0.31 of kernel and version 3.0.1 of card services. Where as I have been using kernel 2.0.2[34] and version 3.0.3[4] of card services. Given that I have exhausted other avenues, it seemed to me that it would be good to install kernel 2.0.31 to see if the problem lies with later kernels. But now I can't even get 2.0.31 to compile. Ahhh! The problem seems to occur in compiling scc.c which seems to be some kind of ham radio driver --- in doing a make menuconfig, I looked to see if I could deselect this driver but it didn't seem to be mentioned by name. If I can get it to not be compiled, perhaps I can avoid these problems --- much of the rest of it seemed to compile okay. Any ideas? Cheers, Mark. __ _\/___\__/___Mark_Phillips___/ \__/_\__/--\__/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ \__/HE___\__/--APTAIN/ \__/_\__/--\__/__/ /__To be is to do.__I. Kant___/ \__/__\__/___/ /__To do is to be.__A. Sartre_/ /__I am.God___/ /__Jesus did.___/ -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: Kernel 2.0.31 won't compile
Hi, in make menuconfig, turn off anythig you do not need immediately, like any unknown drivers. (look at makefiles and .config to know what to turn off). I too have a hinote vp 575 laptop and a Xircom ehternet/modem card, but I have not yet loaded Linux on the laptop -- I'sd appreciate it if you would keep me posted. I did put base on the machine, and the card was recognized without putting pcmcia on the system. I'll mail reports back here. manoj -- If you juggle with knives, you're likely to get cut. Kieran Donegal Manoj Srivastava [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.datasync.com/%7Esrivasta/ Key C7261095 fingerprint = CB D9 F4 12 68 07 E4 05 CC 2D 27 12 1D F5 E8 6E -- Unsubscribe? mail -s unsubscribe [EMAIL PROTECTED] /dev/null
Re: autofs and 2.0.31
On Thu, Nov 13, 1997 at 11:48:38PM +, G. Kapetanios wrote: I have compiled a 2.0.31 kernel. One of the reasons for doing so was to use autofs. However when I did make menuconfig I didn't see an option for autofs support. I thought it was in the kernel anyway and instaled he package. However the package does not find autofs support and won't start. Does anyone use this package? If yes, how I go about activating autofs support ? Maybe you should answer 'y' to the 'Prompt for development and/or incomplete code/drivers' question (that is the first one) when you do the make menuconfig; it will ask lots of new questions about experimental drivers, among which you will find the autofs question -- in the FS section. We have autofs working with a 2.0.31 kernel here, so you're not an isolated case! olive -- Olivier Tharan, [EMAIL PROTECTED] If only women came with pull-down menus and online help. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31 kernel - SCSI problems
I tried 2.0.31, but found that it broke my SCSI system - it would no longer acknowledge the existence of tapedrive or scanner. This was apparent at boot-time, when they no longer appeared on the SCSI device list. I am using an Adaptec 2940UW with the aic7xxx SCSI kernel code. I wanted this kernel to use with the new isdnutils package, which requires it. Can anyone suggest how to get the SCSI code working right? -- Oliver Elphick[EMAIL PROTECTED] Isle of Wight http://lfix.co.uk/oliver PGP key from public servers; key ID 32B8FAA1 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
autofs and 2.0.31
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote - I have compiled a 2.0.31 kernel. One of the reasons for doing so was to use autofs. However when I did make menuconfig I didn't see an option for autofs support. I thought it was in the kernel anyway and instaled he package. However the package does not find autofs support and won't start. Does anyone use this package? If yes, how I go about activating autofs support ? I remember seeing some such problem too. Try the following - * Make sure you have chosen 'y' for 'Prompt for experimental modules / drivers'. autofs support is still considered to be experimental. * I would recommend 'make config'. I definitely saw 'autofs' support when I configured this way. S. -- It was so humiliating. They put me on a cold mettalic table and probed me with Wait a minute. That was my last physical. -- Homer J Simpson Sudhakar C13n (650) 937-2354 (O) International Websites Engineer (415) 940-1896 (H) http://people.netscape.com/thaths/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
autofs and 2.0.31
Hi, I have compiled a 2.0.31 kernel. One of the reasons for doing so was to use autofs. However when I did make menuconfig I didn't see an option for autofs support. I thought it was in the kernel anyway and instaled he package. However the package does not find autofs support and won't start. Does anyone use this package? If yes, how I go about activating autofs support ? Thanks George --- George Kapetanios Churchill College Cambridge, CB3 0DSE-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] U.K. WWW: http://garfield.chu.cam.ac.uk/~gk205/work_info.html --- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
2.0.31 kernel
Hi, I have just installed 2.0.31. I have heard from the list that it might be unstable. However, the statistical package I use for my work seems to be working noticeably faster with this kernel. Has anyone noticed any marked performance improvement or am I mistaken ? George --- George Kapetanios Churchill College Cambridge, CB3 0DSE-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] U.K. WWW: http://garfield.chu.cam.ac.uk/~gk205/work_info.html --- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
2.0.31: no more than 8 swap partitions, memory leaks?
Hi, I am testing a new installation of 2.0.31 on the latetest stable Debian. Two things to notice up to now. I left a torture test run on disks (three Bonnie processes running in parallel). All was okay, apparently. While doing so, I tried to run mirror on the Debian ftp site, and mirror grew in memory up to 100 MB or so (exhausting all virtual memory). At that point, every program I tried to execute (ls or ps, for example) dumped core. That's not nice behaviour. What's worst, memory remained in use after having managed to kill mirror. With an idle system, memory occupancy reported by free was 50 MB higher than just after reboot. Is 2.0.31 known to suffer from memory leaks and bad behaviour when exhausting virtual memory? That would be very bad for a Unix kernel. What is the latest really stable kernel? 2.0.27? Another thing is that swapon does not let me add more than 8 swap partitions. I read in the FAQ that up to 16 were allowed, but that number is not reported in the swapon(8) nor in the swapon(2) manpages. Moreover, swapon -s will fail, telling that no /proc/swaps is present. That's true, but shouldn't have it been created by the Debian installation? How can I create it? Thanks to everyone. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
2.0.31 kernel source
Does anyone know when the kernel-source-2.0.31 package will be ready ? Or is it exactly the same as the tar.gz source files available from, say, www.kernel.org in which case getting that would do the job ? Thanks George --- George Kapetanios Churchill College Cambridge, CB3 0DSE-Mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] U.K. WWW: http://garfield.chu.cam.ac.uk/~gk205/work_info.html --- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31 kernel source
On Sat, 8 Nov 1997, G. Kapetanios wrote:
Does anyone know when the kernel-source-2.0.31 package will be ready ?
Or is it exactly the same as the tar.gz source files available from, say,
www.kernel.org in which case getting that would do the job ?
Fetching the source from www.kernel.org will work fine (just don't make
the /usr/include/{linux,asm} links that the kernel code suggests. Running
make-kpkg (available as the kernel-package package) will build a .deb that
you can install.
--
Scott K. Ellis [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gate.net/~storm/
--
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: [Q] autofs and kernel 2.0.31
On Tue, Oct 28, 1997 at 12:55:45PM -0700, Sudhakar Chandrasekharan wrote: Speaking of automounting, have any of you folks come across a way of automounting SMB volumes? I don't like smbclient/smbmount. The autofs-pre15 patch updates the man page to show such an example, the code might be already in 0.3.14, so it's worth a try (but if it is not, that would be one good reason to re-compile the thing ;) Put the following in your map : windoze-fstype=smbfs ://windoze/c (from the man page : [This] makes a share exported from a Windows machine available for automounting.) Hope this helps, olive -- Olivier Tharan, [EMAIL PROTECTED] SET DEVICE=EXXON to screw up your environment. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: [Q] autofs and kernel 2.0.31
Sudhakar Chandrasekharan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Speaking of automounting, have any of you folks come across a way of automounting SMB volumes? I don't like smbclient/smbmount. You could look at rumba, which might not be in Debian. It does SMB mounting in an NFS-like way, which might work with autofs. Or it might not. -- Carey Evans * http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/c.evans/ gc Neniu anticipas la hispanan Inkvizicion. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: [Q] autofs and kernel 2.0.31
I actually looked at rumba with a view to packaging it for Debian. I think it could be a useful contribution. However I had a devil of a time trying to compile it. Apparently it partly uses code directly from the kernel source and headers which as we know change rapidly. I got a massive amount of errors with libc6 and 2.0.30. Hopefully there is something I'm missing but it looks to me like it would need a big rewrite to work with current Debian systems and that's beyond my capabilities. If anyone else wants to try, please do. It could be a nice addition. -- Jaldhar H. Vyas [EMAIL PROTECTED] On 29 Oct 1997, Carey Evans wrote: Sudhakar Chandrasekharan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Speaking of automounting, have any of you folks come across a way of automounting SMB volumes? I don't like smbclient/smbmount. You could look at rumba, which might not be in Debian. It does SMB mounting in an NFS-like way, which might work with autofs. Or it might not. -- Carey Evans * http://home.clear.net.nz/pages/c.evans/ gc Neniu anticipas la hispanan Inkvizicion. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
[Q] autofs and kernel 2.0.31
Hi, Thanks, first of all, to all the folks who answered my questions on getting Sound and CD to work on my Compaq DeskPro XL. I have been fooling around with kernel 2.0.31 that I downloaded from funet.fi I see that autofs support is included with this release of the kernel. Are there docs on autofs? I am currently using amd and would like to switch to autofs. I also downloaded autofs-0.3.14 This has the autofs deamons and modules and a patchfile for kernel 2.0.30 I am unable to compile kernel 2.0.30 with autofs support. That is the reason I moved up to kernel 2.0.31 How should I proceed with kernel 2.0.31 and autofs? Would the autofs deamon 0.3.14 wouk with the autofs support in kernel 2.0.31? Thaths -- Expiry date June Nineteen Eighty Nin-Two Thousand Twelve. -- Homer J Simpson Sudhakar C13n (650) 937-2354 (O) International Websites Engineer (415) 940-1896 (H) http://people.netscape.com/thaths/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: [Q] autofs and kernel 2.0.31
On Tue, Oct 28, 1997 at 10:56:28AM -0700, Sudhakar Chandrasekharan wrote: How should I proceed with kernel 2.0.31 and autofs? Would the autofs deamon 0.3.14 wouk with the autofs support in kernel 2.0.31? I'd say, if the patches for autofs are included in 2.0.31, go ahead, just install autofs-0.3.14 and use the kernel configured for autofs support. It has worked fine for some time now in the 2.1.x series, so I suppose the 2.0.31 support is the latest. Installation of the daemon is fairly easy, just let it install, and make your maps /etc/auto.master with everything sensible. Then, launch the daemon and here you go! If you have any problems, feel free to tell me, I've installed autofs without a glitch. olive -- Olivier Tharan, [EMAIL PROTECTED] This message transmited on 100% recycled electrons. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: [Q] autofs and kernel 2.0.31
Olivier THARAN wrote: On Tue, Oct 28, 1997 at 10:56:28AM -0700, Sudhakar Chandrasekharan wrote: How should I proceed with kernel 2.0.31 and autofs? Would the autofs deamon 0.3.14 wouk with the autofs support in kernel 2.0.31? I'd say, if the patches for autofs are included in 2.0.31, go ahead, just install autofs-0.3.14 and use the kernel configured for autofs support. It has worked fine for some time now in the 2.1.x series, so I suppose the 2.0.31 support is the latest. Installation of the daemon is fairly easy, just let it install, and make your maps /etc/auto.master with everything sensible. Then, launch the daemon and here you go! I just found an even better method. Just downloaded autofs from hamm (unstable). I prefer the Debian distribution to a local installation. If the hamm autofs installation goes OK I'm set. If it does not work out, I can always make a local installation of autofs. Speaking of automounting, have any of you folks come across a way of automounting SMB volumes? I don't like smbclient/smbmount. Thaths -- Expiry date June Nineteen Eighty Nin-Two Thousand Twelve. -- Homer J Simpson Sudhakar C13n (650) 937-2354 (O) International Websites Engineer (415) 940-1896 (H) http://people.netscape.com/thaths/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31
Lindsay Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I am getting error/warnings on both bo and hamm boxes after installing 2.0.31. Anybody else having trouble with it? I noticed the following strange bugs: - a similiar to the one you reported some days before: Sep 24 19:59:39 marvin kernel: Warning: dev (03:02) tty-count(1) != \ #fd's(2) in do_tty_hangup but this time for terminals and not for serial devices - the aix7xxx driver seems to be very unstable when enabling any of the new features like SCB paging. Especially when accessing SCSI tapes the system could crash with this enabled (due the crashing I have no lines in my logs :-(, I only see them on my tty12). I'm currently using 2.0.31pre9 with patch 10-2. But as this version (of course with SCB paging disabled) is more stable than 2.0.30 I use still use it. I didn't notices any crashes (expect due the scsi driver) yet. Torsten -- And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere up in space. Because there's bugger all down here on Earth Monthy Python, Galaxy Song PGP Public key available -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31
Lindsay Allen wrote: I am getting error/warnings on both bo and hamm boxes after installing 2.0.31. Anybody else having trouble with it? Yep. Random freezes, generally when I'm not using the machine, in the dead of night (the *worst* time for a computer to freeze). -- see shy jo, back to 2.0.29 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31
Yes. I was having a problem with PPP - after 6-8 hours it would drop the connection, and then die shortly after reconnecting with the messages in /var/log/ppp.log Oct 20 07:14:33 fleming pppd[11094]: No response to 5 echo-requests Oct 20 07:14:33 fleming pppd[11094]: Serial link appears to be disconnected. Oct 20 07:14:33 fleming pppd[11094]: Connection terminated. Getting rid of the module and then reloading it seemed to cure the problem for at least the next 6-8 hours. There have been reports of memory leaks with 2.0.31 - I wonder? And then last night while I was sleeping, the whole machine locked up solid on me. No error messages, nothing on the screen. I'm using 2.0.30 now - just to see if the problems go away. I think they have. I'm going to take another stab at 2.0.31 to see if I can figure out the PPP problem at least -- I'm running LinuxHQ now, so it's about time I learned how to do some serious kernel hacking. So be careful with 2.0.31 - it's a massive upgrade (7 months, 976K patch from 2.0.30) - so there are going to be lots and lots of bugs. (Arrgh, just found a HTML bug on the changes page on LinuxHQ - nobody told me!) Cheers, - Jim pgpIozdRQpbh2.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 2.0.31
On Tue, 21 Oct 1997, Joey Hess wrote: Lindsay Allen wrote: I am getting error/warnings on both bo and hamm boxes after installing 2.0.31. Anybody else having trouble with it? Yep. Random freezes, generally when I'm not using the machine, in the dead of night (the *worst* time for a computer to freeze). I've been running it for 24 hours now with no problems, other than the map file error at boot up. Lately I have been building my kernels without module support. I have heard that some of the modules in .31 don't load and unload properly at all times. Is it possible this is your problem? That is, are you using kerneld? Luck, Dwarf -- _-_-_-_-_-_- _-_-_-_-_-_-_- aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (904) 656-9769 Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL 32308 _-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- On Wed, 22 Oct 1997, Lindsay Allen wrote: I am getting error/warnings on both bo and hamm boxes after installing 2.0.31. Anybody else having trouble with it? Nope, Not a problem here. It seems to know my hardware well. Granted I have only a three day uptime since the new kernel reboot. 7:45am up 2 days, 20:52h, 5 users, load average: 0.16, 0.07, 0.02 Linux bitgate 2.0.31 #1 Sat Oct 19 19:57:37 PDT 1997 i586 unknown - -Eric -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3a Charset: noconv iQCVAwUBNE4SNKDN4t3E2gMVAQG/nQQAsOmwBd+8/IcY0L9BUjkOpJndsFAwl54V uj2yqCk9xgvrwQFlKBPd7GXiqV1Cl+I4FrnIbSOvdjXNDM3Fp5Q+Q8zqYS0Tuto1 ZDNMI9b14IO+xHcMkSk5fQsHkdXMmhgVYCqmzCC1ZMjGv7+juguFPngETpfdBXLU fw4O8V5XQPs= =HRr9 -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31
On Wed, 22 Oct 1997, Dale Scheetz wrote: I've been running it for 24 hours now with no problems, other than the map file error at boot up. Lately I have been building my kernels without module support. I have heard that some of the modules in .31 don't load and unload properly at all times. Is it possible this is your problem? That is, are you using kerneld? I'm using kerneld and loading the ip_masq_ and bsd_comp modules, sound and all other things I need are compiled in, I've had it running a few days with no errors, and I found they fixed the SB configuration bug in make menuconfig These are the stats on my system with the new kernel: Linux shadow 2.0.31 #1 Sun Oct 19 15:49:24 EDT 1997 i486 unknown BTW: I am running an unstable system, using most of the packages in hamm/base except sysklogd which I suspect crashed my system before. G'razel the shifty kitty Tapestries FurryMUCK FuroticaMUCK [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.aye.net/~kestrel To err is human, To purr feline. -- Robert Byrne -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31
Dale Scheetz wrote: I've been running it for 24 hours now with no problems, other than the map file error at boot up. Lately I have been building my kernels without module support. I have heard that some of the modules in .31 don't load and unload properly at all times. Is it possible this is your problem? That is, are you using kerneld? Yes, I'm using kerneld. The module that loads and uploads the most here (the only one that's likely to do so in the night when I'm gone) is the sound module. My error message I once saw was this: kite kernel: kernel panic: skput:over: 0014348c:4008. I dunno what it means. Also, the kernel often crashes within 2 minutes of bootup. It seems unlikely that a module would be unloading then. -- see shy jo -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31
On Wed, 22 Oct 1997, Joey Hess wrote: Dale Scheetz wrote: I've been running it for 24 hours now with no problems, other than the map file error at boot up. Lately I have been building my kernels without module support. I have heard that some of the modules in .31 don't load and unload properly at all times. Is it possible this is your problem? That is, are you using kerneld? Yes, I'm using kerneld. The module that loads and uploads the most here (the only one that's likely to do so in the night when I'm gone) is the sound module. My error message I once saw was this: kite kernel: kernel panic: skput:over: 0014348c:4008. I dunno what it means. Also, the kernel often crashes within 2 minutes of bootup. It seems unlikely that a module would be unloading then. That is exactly when they start unloading! I once had a pppd problem because I loaded serial as a module. At bootup it would use setserial to set the proper interupt for the modem. If I started pppd within 2 minutes of bootup everthing worked fine. If I tried to start pppd after 2 minutes it would fail because, although serial got reloaded, it had the wrong, default, interupt values and wouldn't work. Luck, Dwarf -- _-_-_-_-_-_- _-_-_-_-_-_-_- aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (904) 656-9769 Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL 32308 _-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31
Dale Scheetz wrote: That is exactly when they start unloading! Yep, you're right, I've relaized that my sounds module could be unloading about then. -- see shy jo -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31
Dale Scheetz wrote: On Tue, 21 Oct 1997, Joey Hess wrote: Lindsay Allen wrote: I am getting error/warnings on both bo and hamm boxes after installing 2.0.31. Anybody else having trouble with it? Yep. Random freezes, generally when I'm not using the machine, in the dead of night (the *worst* time for a computer to freeze). I've been running it for 24 hours now with no problems, other than the map file error at boot up. Lately I have been building my kernels without module support. I have heard that some of the modules in .31 don't load and unload properly at all times. Is it possible this is your problem? That is, are you using kerneld? Same here. Linux 2.0.31 is running as solid as ever, but I don't use modules. Paul Serice -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31
On Wed, 22 Oct 1997, Joey Hess wrote: Dale Scheetz wrote: That is exactly when they start unloading! Yep, you're right, I've relaized that my sounds module could be unloading about then. Make an explicit entry in /etc/modules for that module and it will stay installed. (even if you have auto enabled) That's how I fixed the serial problem I had. Luck, Dwarf -- _-_-_-_-_-_- _-_-_-_-_-_-_- aka Dale Scheetz Phone: 1 (904) 656-9769 Flexible Software 11000 McCrackin Road e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tallahassee, FL 32308 _-_-_-_-_-_- If you don't see what you want, just ask _-_-_-_-_-_-_- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
2.0.31
I am getting error/warnings on both bo and hamm boxes after installing 2.0.31. Anybody else having trouble with it? Lindsay =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Lindsay Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] Perth, Western Australia voice +61 8 9316 248632.0125S 115.8445Evk6lj =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31
On Wed, 22 Oct 1997, Lindsay Allen wrote: I am getting error/warnings on both bo and hamm boxes after installing 2.0.31. Anybody else having trouble with it? Yes. In fact, I had so much troubles with it I am now back to 2.0.30. I had two problems that caused hardware not to be detected properly: 1. If I compiled support for my 3COM 3c509 card as a module, the module didn't want to be loaded at all. I got an error about a symbol 'io' that was missing or something like that. If I compiled it into the kernel there was nothing wrong with it. 2. My CD-ROM drive would not be detected at all. It is /dev/hdd and when the IDE-probing gets to hdd, a lot of garbage is displayed and no drive is found. The boot process continues normally. I have two network cards, a 3c509 and a NE2000-compatible. My CD-ROM drive is a Mitsumi double-speed drive with IDE interface. They don't give any problems with kernels before 2.0.31 (I started using Linux when 2.0.25 was new). Remco -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31 source
On 19 Oct 1997, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: On Sun, Oct 19, 1997 at 08:43:07PM +0200, Joost Kooij wrote: On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I downloaded the .31 kernel and tried to do a make menuconfig and got the following: rm -f include/asm ( cd include ; ln -sf asm-i386 asm) make -C scripts/lxdialog all make[1]: Entering directory /usr/src/kernel-source-2.0.31/scripts/lxdialog' gcc -O2 -Wall -fomit-frame-pointer -DLOCALE -DCURSES_LOC=curses.h -c lxdialog.c -o lxdialog.o In file included from lxdialog.c:22: dialog.h:29: curses.h: No such file or directory make[1]: *** [lxdialog.o] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory /usr/src/kernel-source-2.0.31/scripts/lxdialog' make: *** [menuconfig] Error 2 Looks like a curses problem. Could you get `make config` to work? and `make xconfig`? Do you have installed ncurses3.4-dev ? I tried this yesterday and it indeed gives that error, probably because I have ncurses3.4-dev installed. Apparently `make menuconfig` breaks because it is confused about the new headers. It is very simple to fix; just do: cd /usr/src/linux/scripts/lxdialog make clean all cd /usr/src/linux make menuconfig and it will work fine again. Hope this helps you, Joost -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31 kernel
1997-10-18 at approximately 09:58 AM -0700, Shaleh wrote: Anyone care to give their opinion on the new 2.0.31 kernel? Manoj any idea when the package will be out? Why wait? Just use the kernel-package package. If that's installed, take a look at /usr/doc/kernel-package/README.gz, kernel-package allows one to build a kernel-image, kernel-source, or kernel-headers (or all three) package from any Linux kernel source tree. -- Joel Klecker URL:mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] URL:http://www.espy.org/ Apple Flavored Unix (Unix for Macs and clones) URL:http://www.espy.org/apple-flavored-unix/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
2.0.31 source
I downloaded the .31 kernel and tried to do a make menuconfig and got the following: rm -f include/asm ( cd include ; ln -sf asm-i386 asm) make -C scripts/lxdialog all make[1]: Entering directory /usr/src/kernel-source-2.0.31/scripts/lxdialog' gcc -O2 -Wall -fomit-frame-pointer -DLOCALE -DCURSES_LOC=curses.h -c lxdialog.c -o lxdialog.o In file included from lxdialog.c:22: dialog.h:29: curses.h: No such file or directory make[1]: *** [lxdialog.o] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory /usr/src/kernel-source-2.0.31/scripts/lxdialog' make: *** [menuconfig] Error 2 any ideas on what needs to be done to get it to work? or any ideas onwhen the debian package for .31 will be available? oh and I am using libc6 on my system with the libc6 dev packages. G'razel the shifty kitty Tapestries FurryMUCK FuroticaMUCK [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.aye.net/~kestrel To err is human, To purr feline. -- Robert Byrne -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31 source
On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I downloaded the .31 kernel and tried to do a make menuconfig and got the following: rm -f include/asm ( cd include ; ln -sf asm-i386 asm) make -C scripts/lxdialog all make[1]: Entering directory /usr/src/kernel-source-2.0.31/scripts/lxdialog' gcc -O2 -Wall -fomit-frame-pointer -DLOCALE -DCURSES_LOC=curses.h -c lxdialog.c -o lxdialog.o In file included from lxdialog.c:22: dialog.h:29: curses.h: No such file or directory make[1]: *** [lxdialog.o] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory /usr/src/kernel-source-2.0.31/scripts/lxdialog' make: *** [menuconfig] Error 2 Looks like a curses problem. Could you get `make config` to work? and `make xconfig`? -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31 source
On Sun, Oct 19, 1997 at 08:43:07PM +0200, Joost Kooij wrote: On Sun, 19 Oct 1997 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I downloaded the .31 kernel and tried to do a make menuconfig and got the following: rm -f include/asm ( cd include ; ln -sf asm-i386 asm) make -C scripts/lxdialog all make[1]: Entering directory /usr/src/kernel-source-2.0.31/scripts/lxdialog' gcc -O2 -Wall -fomit-frame-pointer -DLOCALE -DCURSES_LOC=curses.h -c lxdialog.c -o lxdialog.o In file included from lxdialog.c:22: dialog.h:29: curses.h: No such file or directory make[1]: *** [lxdialog.o] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory /usr/src/kernel-source-2.0.31/scripts/lxdialog' make: *** [menuconfig] Error 2 Looks like a curses problem. Could you get `make config` to work? and `make xconfig`? Do you have installed ncurses3.4-dev ? Marcus -- Rhubarb is no Egyptian god. Marcus Brinkmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
2.0.31 kernel
Anyone care to give their opinion on the new 2.0.31 kernel? Manoj any idea when the package will be out? -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: 2.0.31 kernel
I had sucessfully installed the 2.0.31 2 days ago, have not working out about the advantage of it, a major notice after rebooting is the disappearance of pci unknown, where it used to be coming out every time I boot my 2.0.30 kernel, that is all I know..:-) good luck kusuma -Original Message- From: Shaleh [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Debian debian-user@lists.debian.org Date: Saturday, October 18, 1997 11:56 PM Subject: 2.0.31 kernel Anyone care to give their opinion on the new 2.0.31 kernel? Manoj any idea when the package will be out? -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Linux kernel 2.0.31????
I agree with jon here. A few weeks ago i tried to compile and run a pre-release of 2.0.31 and had all kinds of problems. I went back to 2.0.30 and everything has been peachy so far. There were two different threads of development for 2.0.31. For a few months David Miller was doing the development, and submitting the patches to Linus. Then a few people pissed off David, and he stopped. Linus picked it up later, starting with a completely redesigned pre3, and now we're at pre7. If you find problems, be sure to report them, so they don't appear in 2.0.31. Dave -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Linux kernel 2.0.31????
Every Linux production server I work on is 2.0.29. Not one single 2.0.30 in the bunch... what's wrong with 2.0.30? am i missing something? I've accidentally deleted the message that talked about ip_masq being fixed in 2.0.30. I think it is fixed by applying a patch to 2.0.30, not by default. Does everyone know about www.linuxhq.com? Dave -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Linux kernel 2.0.31????
When is 31 going to be finished? There are already pre-31 patches ... with it, the BEST thing you can do at this point is install 2.0.29 and ... Out of curiosity what's so evil about 2.0.30? It is the first kernel I've tried since 0.99pl8 that I couldn't keep running. We had immediate trouble with our network card, a 3c590, due to a broken driver. Other folks have had trouble with it under low memory conditions, due to some changes that were supposed to speed things up from 2.0.29. If you run badblocks -w on a partition (note: this will wipe out your partition!) you will exhaust your buffers and experience problems on 2.0.30. We've had no problems whatsoever running pre-patch-7 applied to 2.0.30; I'd recommend at least testing it, because if you don't find problems with it it will soon become 2.0.31. (After a couple of known minorkinks are worked out.) -- Pete Harlan [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Linux kernel 2.0.31????
When is 31 going to be finished? There are already pre-31 patches out.. all the way up to 5. -Paul -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Linux kernel 2.0.31????
George Bonser [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I have been just WAINTING for someone to bring this up. In my personal opinion, Linus is making a mistake by introducing new features in the release tree and it results in having two development trees going at the Which features in 2.0.31 are the new ones you're objecting to? Almost all of them are driver updates, buffer chache fixes, security patches and finally SMP fixes. The buffer cache problem has been _extermely_ difficult and unfortunately is one of those things that needs time to test in order to insure that it actually fixes things (.31-7 seems to be broken for example). same time. Somehow the old way of releasing bug-fixes only in the stable tree has changed to introducing features from the develpment tree into the stable tree. This results in things breaking and a lot of effort spent on fixes that might in turn break something else, etc. And that led to _everyone_ using the development kernels, getting burnt and complaining that Linux was a moving target that no one could develop for. Hence the reasoning to backport some new improvements, mostly just driver updates to keep people from installing 2.1.45 and blowing away their filesystem and getting on all the mailing lists and raising a stink. From my reading of the kernel developers list, .31 has become like squeezing a water balloon. As of last night I was reading about bugs in pre.31-7 but Linus has made noises about freezing .31 and going to .32 if need be because they HAVE to get fixes out for .30 which is pretty poor when it comes to virtual memory management. Personally I think it was a problem of waiting too long to do .31 (thanks to a couple of whiners), just too many patches to put in the pot. - Steve .. #* # # # # # # | Steve Baker | Barely Working | # ## # # # # # | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | System Administrator | ## # # # # # # | Red-Hat Rulz! | Will work for hardware | ## # ## # # # # `-- SYS-ADMIN FOR HIRE, HAVE UNIX, WILL TRAVEL --' # # # ## # # -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Linux kernel 2.0.31????
I have been just WAINTING for someone to bring this up. In my personal opinion, Linus is making a mistake by introducing new features in the release tree and it results in having two development trees going at the same time. Somehow the old way of releasing bug-fixes only in the stable tree has changed to introducing features from the develpment tree into the stable tree. This results in things breaking and a lot of effort spent on fixes that might in turn break something else, etc. Which new features are you talking about? Be sure not to confuse increased support for some devices with adding new features. I remember before 1.2.13 came out how everyone rushed around to get support for the Adaptec aic7xxx series of boards, and having to apply a patch to get my board to be recognized, let alone acknowledged as being stable.. We don't want that to happen again.. From my reading of the kernel developers list, .31 has become like squeezing a water balloon. As of last night I was reading about bugs in pre.31-7 but Linus has made noises about freezing .31 and going to .32 if need be because they HAVE to get fixes out for .30 which is pretty poor when it comes to virtual memory management. They are now actively persuing development of .30. It seemed for a while work on the 2.0 series had stopped. Linus planned to release 2.0.31 last weekend, if there were no more problems.. Well, it hasn't been released yet... Dave -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Linux kernel 2.0.31????
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Dave Wreski wrote: When is 31 going to be finished? There are already pre-31 patches out.. all the way up to 5. They are up to pre-7 now. Looks like there's still a few problems to be worked out, to be sure we have a nice stable kernel. The best thing you can do at this point is to install pre-7 on all your machines, and test it heavily, to be sure there are no bugs. And be sure to report the ones you do find, so we're sure to have a stable one.. I would say for those of us who don't know how (or don't want to) mess with it, the BEST thing you can do at this point is install 2.0.29 and leave it at that. Every Linux production server I work on is 2.0.29. Not one single 2.0.30 in the bunch... Later, Paul --- J. Paul Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] || [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computer, you and I need to have a little talk... --Chief Miles O'Brien, Emissary, Star Trek: DS9 Geek Code and various other frivolities at www.verinet.com/~preed -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Linux kernel 2.0.31????
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, J. Paul Reed wrote: I would say for those of us who don't know how (or don't want to) mess with it, the BEST thing you can do at this point is install 2.0.29 and leave it at that. Every Linux production server I work on is 2.0.29. Not one single 2.0.30 in the bunch... what's wrong with 2.0.30? am i missing something? thanks -adam -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Linux kernel 2.0.31????
On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, J. Paul Reed wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Dave Wreski wrote: When is 31 going to be finished? There are already pre-31 patches out.. all the way up to 5. They are up to pre-7 now. Looks like there's still a few problems to be worked out, to be sure we have a nice stable kernel. The best thing you can do at this point is to install pre-7 on all your machines, and test it heavily, to be sure there are no bugs. And be sure to report the ones you do find, so we're sure to have a stable one.. I would say for those of us who don't know how (or don't want to) mess with it, the BEST thing you can do at this point is install 2.0.29 and leave it at that. Every Linux production server I work on is 2.0.29. Not one single 2.0.30 in the bunch... I believe IP Masquerading was fixed in 2.0.30.. so I must run at least .30 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Linux kernel 2.0.31????
J. Paul Reed wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Dave Wreski wrote: When is 31 going to be finished? There are already pre-31 patches out.. all the way up to 5. They are up to pre-7 now. Looks like there's still a few problems to be worked out, to be sure we have a nice stable kernel. The best thing you can do at this point is to install pre-7 on all your machines, and test it heavily, to be sure there are no bugs. And be sure to report the ones you do find, so we're sure to have a stable one.. I would say for those of us who don't know how (or don't want to) mess with it, the BEST thing you can do at this point is install 2.0.29 and leave it at that. Every Linux production server I work on is 2.0.29. Not one single 2.0.30 in the bunch... Out of curiosity what's so evil about 2.0.30? --Chris -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Linux kernel 2.0.31????
boy, your slighly behind :) Its up to pre7 -- its too bad that the pre's are having more trouble on the even note than the development i run 2.1.50 at home just peachy and here at LBJ High School we run 2.0.30 pre3 with a few little nicks here and there and its buggy :( --- Jon Torrez, LBJ High School Sr. Admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.stac.org\/ http://www.lbjhs.austin.isd.tenet.edu --- On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Paul Miller wrote: When is 31 going to be finished? There are already pre-31 patches out.. all the way up to 5. -Paul -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Linux kernel 2.0.31????
On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, Christopher Smith wrote: J. Paul Reed wrote: On Thu, 21 Aug 1997, Dave Wreski wrote: When is 31 going to be finished? There are already pre-31 patches out.. all the way up to 5. They are up to pre-7 now. Looks like there's still a few problems to be worked out, to be sure we have a nice stable kernel. The best thing you can do at this point is to install pre-7 on all your machines, and test it heavily, to be sure there are no bugs. And be sure to report the ones you do find, so we're sure to have a stable one.. I would say for those of us who don't know how (or don't want to) mess with it, the BEST thing you can do at this point is install 2.0.29 and leave it at that. Every Linux production server I work on is 2.0.29. Not one single 2.0.30 in the bunch... Out of curiosity what's so evil about 2.0.30? Nothing particularly evil; but if we're up to pre-patch 7, there were (are) obviously some problems with it (and I can't seem to remember what they specifically are; as I remember it was something to do with some esoteric networking thing or something...) I personally like the number 2.0.30 better than 2.0.29, but doesn't mean I'd run that kernel ;) I think I'll wait for 2.0.31, unless it turns out it has some nasty bugs too. As a friend of mine was explaining it, the non-development kernels are for the most part pretty stable, but if you find a bug, lots of things can break then :) Later, Paul --- J. Paul Reed [EMAIL PROTECTED] || [EMAIL PROTECTED] Computer, you and I need to have a little talk... --Chief Miles O'Brien, Emissary, Star Trek: DS9 Geek Code and various other frivolities at www.verinet.com/~preed -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: Linux kernel 2.0.31????
On Fri, 22 Aug 1997, jon torrez wrote: boy, your slighly behind :) Its up to pre7 -- its too bad that the pre's are having more trouble on the even note than the development i run 2.1.50 at home just peachy and here at LBJ High School we run 2.0.30 pre3 with a few little nicks here and there and its buggy :( I agree with jon here. A few weeks ago i tried to compile and run a pre-release of 2.0.31 and had all kinds of problems. I went back to 2.0.30 and everything has been peachy so far. Cheers Juan Casero - Evanseck Research Group Department of Chemistry University of Miami Coral Gables, Florida email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - __ _ / / (_)__ __ __ / /__/ / _ \/ // /\ \/ / . . . t h e c h o i c e o f a //_/_//_/\_,_/ /_/\_\ G N U g e n e r a t i o n . . . -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
kernel errors under Linux pre-patch-2.0.31-3
I tested the kernel pre-patch-2.0.31-3 from www.linuxhq.com because it's got support for hardware I use. I use Debian 1.3 with upgrades for 2.1.X kernels. Under this kernel, I'm logging errors like: Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address e0202024 current-tss.cr3 = 00742000, Lr3 = 00742000 *pde = Oops: CPU:0 EIP:0010:[free_wait+40/68] EFLAGS: 00010007 eax: 033b3000 ebx: 033b3018 ecx: 20202020 edx: 20202020 esi: 0207 edi: 0070ce9c ebp: esp: 0070ce74 ds: 0018 es: 0018 fs: 002b gs: 002b ss: 0018 Process emacs (pid: 186, process nr: 37, stackpage=0070c000) Stack: 0006 0037d180 0012c66e 0070ce9c 0100 b638 0816c0a4 033b3000 0002 033b3000 0012c8c7 0006 0070cf54 0070cf14 0070ced4 0070cf74 0070cf34 0070cef4 0816c0a4 0400 b5dc b6d0 Call Trace: [do_select+414/484] [sys_select+387/596] [old_select+63/80] [system_call+85/128] Code: 8b 42 04 39 d8 74 05 89 c2 eb f5 90 89 4a 04 56 9d 8b 0f 85 Unable to handle kernel paging request at virtual address e0202020 current-tss.cr3 = 00101000, Lr3 = 00101000 *pde = Oops: CPU:0 EIP:0010:[wake_up_interruptible+53/220] EFLAGS: 00010012 eax: 0112ff50 ebx: 20202030 ecx: 0112ff50 edx: 20202020 esi: 0112fec4 edi: 0112ff4c ebp: 0070cd84 esp: 0070cd78 ds: 0018 es: 0018 fs: 002b gs: 002b ss: 0018 Process emacs (pid: 186, process nr: 37, stackpage=0070c000) Stack: 03928580 0112fec4 0112fec4 03c50810 00129f71 0112ff50 00122384 0112fec4 03928580 03928580 001223f4 03928580 0112fec4 0027 0003 0001 00116782 03928580 002b 0014 0070d000 0070ce38 0010aba3 Call Trace: [pipe_read_release+21/28] [__fput+28/64] [close_fp+76/92] [do_exit+274/492] [die_if_kernel+695/704] [0500] [0480] [pmgr_read+12/352] [do_page_fault+698/716] [do_page_fault+0/716] [tty_select+145/164] [error_code+64/80] [free_wait+40/68] [do_select+414/484] [sys_select+387/596] [old_select+63/80] [system_call+85/128] Code: 8b 02 83 f8 01 75 5e 9c 5e fa c7 02 00 00 00 00 83 7a 4c 00 The errors have caused X to freeze up and die, but not no system crash so far. The first time I booted this kernel, `su' and `bash' would seg fault, but I'm haven't been able to reproduce this. Is this worth a bug report to kernel developers? (Linus?) What should I track down? What info should be included, and where should the report be sent? -- Peter Galbraith, research scientist [EMAIL PROTECTED] Maurice-Lamontagne Institute, Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada P.O. Box 1000, Mont-Joli Qc, G5H 3Z4 Canada 418-775-0852 - FAX 418-775-0546 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: dhpcd_0.5.16.1-2 - kernel 2.0.31?
It looks like I have to retract that change. Linus has released another pre patch for 2.0.31 today without the SO_BINDTODEVICE patches. You can find the necessary patches at www.linuxhq.com. In article [EMAIL PROTECTED] you wrote: : On Mon, 4 Aug 1997, Christoph Lameter wrote: : : I wanted to upgrade my DHCP daemon to the latest upstream version : : that is already packaged in Hamm (dhpcd_0.5.16.1-2). However, : : the package says that it won't work with kernels = 2.0.30 so : : it needs at least 2.0.31. : : There was a promise made to release 2.0.31 soon a while back. The already : existing pre-patches to 2.0.31 provide functionality to make DHCP able to : use multiple interfaces. : : Build your kernel using these patches and everything will work. : I assume you meant that the patches are for 2.0.30. : Were are these patches located. : Thanks, : -- : Jean Pierre : -- : TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to : [EMAIL PROTECTED] . : Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . -- --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- Please always CC me when replying to posts on mailing lists. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: dhpcd_0.5.16.1-2 - kernel 2.0.31?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- On Mon, 4 Aug 1997, Christoph Lameter wrote: It looks like I have to retract that change. Linus has released another pre patch for 2.0.31 today without the SO_BINDTODEVICE patches. You can find the necessary patches at www.linuxhq.com. Where? I couldn't identify any of the Linux 2.0 Unofficial Patches with the SO_BINDTODEVICE patch. Nils - -- \ /| Nils Rennebarth --* WINDOWS 42 *-- | Schillerstr. 61 / \| 37083 Göttingen | ++49-551-71626 Micro$oft's final answer | http://www.nus.de/~nils -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQB1AwUBM+b1/lptA0IhBm0NAQFgVgL+J9f1L2yyRk4bMyv9Ih//kK+N+jrc//+V pZFWuh7zbuymOQ6xAoxJm5UmY9opvDX1OHD3S9n/UIixvJyrpVVOS0m7EZjFmwEy 6i+FyrbHIXKHTPNmiW7kv9nfXVHKhN/R =B3jF -END PGP SIGNATURE- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: dhpcd_0.5.16.1-2 - kernel 2.0.31?
2.0.31-pre2 for example On Tue, 5 Aug 1997, Nils Rennebarth wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- On Mon, 4 Aug 1997, Christoph Lameter wrote: It looks like I have to retract that change. Linus has released another pre patch for 2.0.31 today without the SO_BINDTODEVICE patches. You can find the necessary patches at www.linuxhq.com. Where? I couldn't identify any of the Linux 2.0 Unofficial Patches with the SO_BINDTODEVICE patch. Nils - -- \ /| Nils Rennebarth --* WINDOWS 42 *-- | Schillerstr. 61 / \| 37083 Göttingen | ++49-551-71626 Micro$oft's final answer | http://www.nus.de/~nils -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: 2.6.3i Charset: noconv iQB1AwUBM+b1/lptA0IhBm0NAQFgVgL+J9f1L2yyRk4bMyv9Ih//kK+N+jrc//+V pZFWuh7zbuymOQ6xAoxJm5UmY9opvDX1OHD3S9n/UIixvJyrpVVOS0m7EZjFmwEy 6i+FyrbHIXKHTPNmiW7kv9nfXVHKhN/R =B3jF -END PGP SIGNATURE- --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: dhpcd_0.5.16.1-2 - kernel 2.0.31?
: I wanted to upgrade my DHCP daemon to the latest upstream version : that is already packaged in Hamm (dhpcd_0.5.16.1-2). However, : the package says that it won't work with kernels = 2.0.30 so : it needs at least 2.0.31. : How come this happens when 2.0.31 hasn't been released yet? Is it : a missunderstanding on my part? There was a promise made to release 2.0.31 soon a while back. The already existing pre-patches to 2.0.31 provide functionality to make DHCP able to use multiple interfaces. Build your kernel using these patches and everything will work. : I had to go back to dhpcd 0.5.14 because indeed it did not work at all : with my 2.0.30 kernel. Please use the stable version if you do not follow Linux Development Projects. I will retract the newer release if there is no Linux 2.0.31 at the end of our development cycle. -- --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- +++ --- Please always CC me when replying to posts on mailing lists. -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
Re: dhpcd_0.5.16.1-2 - kernel 2.0.31?
On Mon, 4 Aug 1997, Christoph Lameter wrote: : I wanted to upgrade my DHCP daemon to the latest upstream version : that is already packaged in Hamm (dhpcd_0.5.16.1-2). However, : the package says that it won't work with kernels = 2.0.30 so : it needs at least 2.0.31. There was a promise made to release 2.0.31 soon a while back. The already existing pre-patches to 2.0.31 provide functionality to make DHCP able to use multiple interfaces. Build your kernel using these patches and everything will work. I assume you meant that the patches are for 2.0.30. Were are these patches located. Thanks, -- Jean Pierre -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
dhpcd_0.5.16.1-2 - kernel 2.0.31?
Hi, I wanted to upgrade my DHCP daemon to the latest upstream version that is already packaged in Hamm (dhpcd_0.5.16.1-2). However, the package says that it won't work with kernels = 2.0.30 so it needs at least 2.0.31. How come this happens when 2.0.31 hasn't been released yet? Is it a missunderstanding on my part? I had to go back to dhpcd 0.5.14 because indeed it did not work at all with my 2.0.30 kernel. Thanks, E.- -- Eloy A. Paris Information Technology Department Rockwell Automation de Venezuela Telephone: +58-2-9432311 Fax: +58-2-9430323 -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
linux 2.0.31 (pre-patch-2.0.31.gz)
Hey I thought you might be interested in this message from David Miller. Apart from the link that is mentioned in the message, for European users it might be faster to download from ftp://oloon.student.utwente.nl/pub/linux/test-kernels/pre-patch-2.0.31.gz Good luck! // Remco van de Meent // email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] // www: http://oloon.student.utwente.nl //Never make any mistaeks. -- Forwarded message -- Date: Wed, 7 May 1997 07:31:09 -0400 From: David S. Miller [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: linux-net@vger.rutgers.edu, [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Begin testing phase for 2.0.31, README I have released a first pre-patch set for 2.0.31, it is the first so it is bound to have some problems, this is why I ask people to begin testing now if they can do so. vger.rutgers.edu:/pub/linux/kernel/testing/pre-patch-2.0.31.gz In particular I know there are some things in this patch set which are not going to make it into 2.0.31 or are going to be rewritten in a cleaner manner (the Intel memory size changes are going to be removed, and the ext2 NO_ATIME support needs to be redone so it is clean like the 2.1.x version of those changes, also the swap cache diffs will be disappearing as well...) Just a brief rundown: 1) Updated networking drivers for Wavelan, and various drivers maintained by Donald Becker. Also an updated de4x5 driver from David C. Davies and Matthew Jacob. 2) GDT scsi array driver is now in the tree, this was _long_ overdue. 3) SO_BINDTODEVICE support has been added to the networking, also there is documentation on it under Documentation/networking Now the free DHCP server should compile out of the box. 4) Various networking bug fixes, too numerous to mention. The transparent proxying support is still up in the air but we'll be working to correct this. Please test this and report back to us so the real 2.0.31 can be as solid as humanly possible, thanks... Finally, don't view anything in this patch set as cast in stone in any way, if you see something bogus, make note of it to us, but don't lose your mind over it as if it really did go into the real 2.0.31 kernel. - Yow! 11.26 MB/s remote host TCP bandwidth 199 usec remote TCP latency over 100Mb/s ethernet. Beat that! -__ o David S. Miller, [EMAIL PROTECTED] /_/ / // /_/ -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word unsubscribe to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
