Re: PCMCIA -Problem nach Update von Kernel 2.2 nach 2.4
On Mon, Jul 10, 2006 at 07:28:15AM +0200, Niels Stargardt wrote: Hmm hier mal die Ausgaben bei beiden Kerneln: Linux tine 2.4.18-1-686 #1 Wed May 17 21:26:54 UTC 2006 i686 unknown Module Size Used byNot tainted pcmcia_core38688 0 apm 8892 1 (autoclean) af_packet 11432 0 (unused) rtc 5400 0 (autoclean) ext2 30400 1 (autoclean) ide-disk6592 2 (autoclean) ide-probe-mod 7968 0 (autoclean) ide-mod 129420 2 (autoclean) [ide-disk ide-probe-mod] ext3 56544 0 (autoclean) jbd35032 0 (autoclean) [ext3] unix 13380 5 (autoclean) /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/i82365.o: init_module: No such device /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/i82365.o: insmod /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/i 82365.o failed /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/i82365.o: insmod i82365 failed Hint: insmod errors can be caused by incorrect module parameters, including invalid IO or IRQ parameters modprobe: pre-install ds failed modprobe: insmod pcnet_cs failed Wurde bei 2.4 nicht i82365 durch yenta_socket ersetzt? Wenn ja, versuch es doch mal mit PCIC=yenta_socket in /etc/default/pcmcia. Laut http://groups.google.de/group/linux.debian.user.german/browse_frm/thread/86b421109b4362e2/ee337bf43c0e7017?lnk=stq=reising+yentarnum=1#ee337bf43c0e7017 hat das beim Wechsel von 2.2.10 auf 2.4.24 geholfen. -- Nicht Absicht unterstellen, wenn auch Dummheit ausreicht! pgpm7Jxg3UxGM.pgp Description: PGP signature
PCMCIA -Problem nach Update von Kernel 2.2 nach 2.4
Moin, moin, ich betreibe hier ein Notebook mit Debian Woody und Kernel 2.2 als Server. Bei dem Notebook ist das Display kaputt und es ist sehr frickelig ein Monitor anzuschliessen. Ich habe versucht auf den 2.4-Kernel zu wechseln. Das System bootet auch, ist aber anschließend nicht per Netz ansprechbar. Leider weiss ich nicht wie ich den Chipsatz von der PCMCIA-Netzwerkkarte herausbekomme. Ich hatte ursprünglich mal eine D-Link DFE-650TXD-Karte benutzt, die ich ausgetauscht habe, ohne etwas konfigurieren zu müssen. Sie sind also vermutlich gleich. Evtl. weiss jemand den Befehl um den Chipsatz abzufragen (Die Karte ist auch nicht so leicht rauszuziehen)? Ich habe herausbekommen, das einige Module nicht korrekt geladen werden. Zunächst das Ergebnis von lsmod mit Kernel 2.2 Linux tine 2.2.20-idepci #1 Sat Apr 20 12:45:19 EST 2002 i686 unknown Module Size Used by pcnet_cs 12644 1 83906088 0 [pcnet_cs] ds 6400 2 [pcnet_cs] i82365 22672 2 pcmcia_core45824 0 [pcnet_cs ds i82365] af_packet 6136 0 (unused) nun das Ergebnis mit Kernel 2.4: Sun Jul 9 21:07:28 CEST 2006 Linux tine 2.4.18-1-686 #1 Wed May 17 21:26:54 UTC 2006 i686 unknown Module Size Used byNot tainted pcmcia_core38688 0 apm 8892 1 (autoclean) af_packet 11432 0 (unused) rtc 5400 0 (autoclean) ext2 30400 1 (autoclean) ide-disk6592 2 (autoclean) ide-probe-mod 7968 0 (autoclean) ide-mod 129420 2 (autoclean) [ide-disk ide-probe-mod] ext3 56544 0 (autoclean) jbd35032 0 (autoclean) [ext3] unix 13380 5 (autoclean) ein modprobe pcnet_cs ergibt folgendes /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/ds.o: init_module: Operation not permitted /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/ds.o: insmod /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/ds.o failed /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/ds.o: insmod pcnet_cs failed Hint: insmod errors can be caused by incorrect module parameters, including invalid IO or IRQ parameters Die Konfiguration ist also nicht rund. Ich verstehe nur nicht wieso ich die Karte anders konfigurieren muss? Und wo stelle ich diese Parameter ein? Vielen Dank für Eure Hinweise. Niels
Re: PCMCIA -Problem nach Update von Kernel 2.2 nach 2.4
On Sun, 9 Jul 2006 21:36:47 +0200 Niels Stargardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ich betreibe hier ein Notebook mit Debian Woody und Kernel 2.2 als Server. Bei dem Notebook ist das Display kaputt und es ist sehr frickelig ein Monitor anzuschliessen. Ich habe versucht auf den 2.4-Kernel zu wechseln. Das System bootet auch, ist aber anschließend nicht per Netz ansprechbar. Leider weiss ich nicht wie ich den Chipsatz von der PCMCIA-Netzwerkkarte herausbekomme. Ich hatte ursprünglich mal eine D-Link DFE-650TXD-Karte benutzt, die ich ausgetauscht habe, ohne etwas konfigurieren zu müssen. Sie sind also vermutlich gleich. Evtl. weiss jemand den Befehl um den Chipsatz abzufragen (Die Karte ist auch nicht so leicht rauszuziehen)? Also wenn ich mich nicht irre, ist lspci intelligent genug auch pcmcia Karten anzuzeigen. (Zumindest unter Sid mit 2.6.x ;-)) Google mit dem passenden String gefüttert sollte dir genug Anhaltspunkte zum Thema Chipsatz und Treiber geben. Ich würde übrigens auf der älteren Hardware dennoch einen 2.6.x empfehlen, der ist etwas performanter wegen den I/O Schedulern. ein modprobe pcnet_cs ergibt folgendes /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/ds.o: init_module: Operation not permitted /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/ds.o: insmod /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/ds.o failed /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/ds.o: insmod pcnet_cs failed Hint: insmod errors can be caused by incorrect module parameters, including invalid IO or IRQ parameters Die Konfiguration ist also nicht rund. Ich verstehe nur nicht wieso ich die Karte anders konfigurieren muss? Und wo stelle ich diese Parameter ein? müsstest du per modprobe modul parameter=wert regeln können, modinfo modul bringt eine Liste der möglichen Parameter mit. -- ^^^| Evgeni -SargentD- Golov ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) d(O_o)b | PGP-Key-ID: 0xAC15B50C -|- | WWW: http://www.die-welt.net ICQ: 54116744 / \| IRC: #sod @ irc.german-freakz.net Fuer windows hab keine Zeit weil wenn ich nachhause komm will ich lieber poppen und nich noch mein OS reparieren (Therion - german-freakz.net) pgpkis5IQVbO8.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: PCMCIA -Problem nach Update von Kernel 2.2 nach 2.4
On 09.07.06 21:49:49, Evgeni Golov wrote: On Sun, 9 Jul 2006 21:36:47 +0200 Niels Stargardt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ich würde übrigens auf der älteren Hardware dennoch einen 2.6.x empfehlen, der ist etwas performanter wegen den I/O Schedulern. Wofuer man aber auch entsprechende Anwendungen braucht. Ausserdem (siehe anderen Thread von Niels von heute nachmittag) ist die Hardware so lahm, das das keinen Unterschied macht. Ausserdem gibts in Woody keinen 2.6er Kernel und er sollte erstmal einen Kernel zum laufen bekommen bevor er das dist-upgrade auf Sarge macht. Und einen 2.6er in Woody zu installieren ist vmtl. deutlich mehr Arbeit als das Modul fuer die Karte korrekt zu laden. Andreas -- Write yourself a threatening letter and pen a defiant reply. -- Haeufig gestellte Fragen und Antworten (FAQ): http://www.de.debian.org/debian-user-german-FAQ/ Zum AUSTRAGEN schicken Sie eine Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] mit dem Subject unsubscribe. Probleme? Mail an [EMAIL PROTECTED] (engl)
Re: PCMCIA -Problem nach Update von Kernel 2.2 nach 2.4
On Sun, 9 Jul 2006 21:49:49 +0200 Evgeni Golov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: vermutlich gleich. Evtl. weiss jemand den Befehl um den Chipsatz abzufragen (Die Karte ist auch nicht so leicht rauszuziehen)? Also wenn ich mich nicht irre, ist lspci intelligent genug auch pcmcia Karten anzuzeigen. (Zumindest unter Sid mit 2.6.x ;-)) Google mit dem passenden String gefüttert sollte dir genug Anhaltspunkte zum Thema Chipsatz und Treiber geben. tine:~# lspci 00:00.0 Host bridge: Intel Corp. 440BX/ZX - 82443BX/ZX Host bridge (AGP disabled) (rev 03) 00:02.0 CardBus bridge: Toshiba America Info Systems ToPIC97 (rev 05) 00:02.1 CardBus bridge: Toshiba America Info Systems ToPIC97 (rev 05) 00:04.0 VGA compatible controller: Trident Microsystems Cyber 9525 (rev 49) 00:05.0 Bridge: Intel Corp. 82371AB PIIX4 ISA (rev 02) 00:05.1 IDE interface: Intel Corp. 82371AB PIIX4 IDE (rev 01) 00:05.2 USB Controller: Intel Corp. 82371AB PIIX4 USB (rev 01) 00:05.3 Bridge: Intel Corp. 82371AB PIIX4 ACPI (rev 02) 00:07.0 Communication controller: Lucent Microelectronics 56k WinModem (rev 01) 00:0a.0 Communication controller: Toshiba America Info Systems FIR Port (rev 23) 00:0c.0 Multimedia audio controller: ESS Technology ES1978 Maestro 2E (rev 10) Also negativ, lspci erkennt die Karte nicht. Ich würde übrigens auf der älteren Hardware dennoch einen 2.6.x empfehlen, der ist etwas performanter wegen den I/O Schedulern. Performance ist kein Problem. Ich will vor allem jetzt erstmal Woody auf 2.4 kriegen. ein modprobe pcnet_cs ergibt folgendes /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/ds.o: init_module: Operation not permitted /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/ds.o: insmod /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/ds.o failed /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/ds.o: insmod pcnet_cs failed Hint: insmod errors can be caused by incorrect module parameters, including invalid IO or IRQ parameters Die Konfiguration ist also nicht rund. Ich verstehe nur nicht wieso ich die Karte anders konfigurieren muss? Und wo stelle ich diese Parameter ein? müsstest du per modprobe modul parameter=wert regeln können, modinfo modul bringt eine Liste der möglichen Parameter mit. Hmm hier mal die Ausgaben bei beiden Kerneln: Linux tine 2.4.18-1-686 #1 Wed May 17 21:26:54 UTC 2006 i686 unknown Module Size Used byNot tainted pcmcia_core38688 0 apm 8892 1 (autoclean) af_packet 11432 0 (unused) rtc 5400 0 (autoclean) ext2 30400 1 (autoclean) ide-disk6592 2 (autoclean) ide-probe-mod 7968 0 (autoclean) ide-mod 129420 2 (autoclean) [ide-disk ide-probe-mod] ext3 56544 0 (autoclean) jbd35032 0 (autoclean) [ext3] unix 13380 5 (autoclean) /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/i82365.o: init_module: No such device /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/i82365.o: insmod /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/i 82365.o failed /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/i82365.o: insmod i82365 failed Hint: insmod errors can be caused by incorrect module parameters, including invalid IO or IRQ parameters modprobe: pre-install ds failed modprobe: insmod pcnet_cs failed filename: /lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/net/pcmcia/pcnet_cs.o description: NE2000 compatible PCMCIA ethernet driver author: David Hinds [EMAIL PROTECTED] license: GPL parm:irq_mask int parm:irq_list int array (min = 1, max = 4) parm:if_port int parm:use_big_buf int parm:mem_speed int parm:delay_output int parm:delay_time int parm:use_shmem int parm:full_duplex int parm:hw_addr int array (min = 6, max = 6) filename:/lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/net/8390.o description: none author: none license: GPL filename:/lib/modules/2.4.18-1-686/kernel/drivers/pcmcia/ds.o description: PCMCIA Driver Services 3.1.22 author: David Hinds [EMAIL PROTECTED] license: Dual MPL/GPL Sun Jul 9 20:25:33 CEST 2006 Linux tine 2.2.20-idepci #1 Sat Apr 20 12:45:19 EST 2002 i686 unknown Module Size Used by pcnet_cs 12644 1 83906088 0 [pcnet_cs] ds 6400 2 [pcnet_cs] i82365 22672 2 pcmcia_core45824 0 [pcnet_cs ds i82365] af_packet 6136 0 (unused) filename:/lib/modules/2.2.20-idepci/pcmcia/pcnet_cs.o description: NE2000 compatible PCMCIA ethernet driver author: David Hinds [EMAIL PROTECTED] license: none parm:irq_mask int parm:irq_list int array (min = 1, max = 4) parm:if_port int parm:use_big_buf int parm:mem_speed int parm:delay_output int parm:delay_time int parm:
gnome 2.2 para 2.4
Ola pessoas. Possuo um laptop PII - 333 - 96 Mb de ram, debian woody com gnome 2.2. Alguns problemas, mas roda bunitinho (engasga no OpenOffice). Duvida: alguem saberia se nesta maquina o gnome 2.4 rodaria sem problemas? Tive problema com o KDE 3.1 para o 3.2. Eis o motivo da pergunta. Se nao tem muita diferenca, gostaria de saber de um bom espelho para download por aqui, como exemplo linorg.usp.br. Valeu!! Marcelo
Re: atualizaçã o de kernel de 2.2 para 2.4 ???
2003-08-01, 09:01 -0300, Rogério Serafini dos Santos: Bom dia! É o seguinte, quando eu executo em um dos meus servidores o comando uname -a aparece Linux 2.2.20-idepci. E nos outros servidores aparece Linux 2.4.18-bf2.4. Isto porque eu necessitei reinstalar aquele servidor e me esqueci de escolher a opção BF24. Só me lembrei depois de tudo pronto. E agora? Como eu faço para atualizar? [87 linhas a menos] É só instalar o kernel-image que você escolher. Eu faço isso usando o dselect, escolho e mando instalar. Até Claudio -- +- .''`. ---| Claudio Clemens in Germany now |--| Sid |---+ | : :' : asturio at gmx.netGNU/Linux User #79942| | `. `'To C or not to C? That's the question! | | `- YE GODS, I HAVE FEET??! - Userfriendly | /=*=\ --cuidado, se vc tivesse um TK85, isso seria uma nave inimiga! pgp4sjHCt4KiX.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: atualização de kernel de 2.2 para 2.4 ???
Bom dia! É o seguinte, quando eu executo em um dos meus servidores o comando uname -a aparece Linux 2.2.20-idepci. E nos outros servidores aparece Linux 2.4.18-bf2.4. Isto porque eu necessitei reinstalar aquele servidor e me esqueci de escolher a opção BF24. Só me lembrei depois de tudo pronto. E agora? Como eu faço para atualizar? Eu pesquisei o pacote kernel-source-2.4.18 e apareceu o seguinte: Description: Linux kernel source for version 2.4.18 This package provides the source code for the Linux kernel version 2.4.18. . You may configure the kernel to your setup by typing make config and following instructions, but you could get ncursesX.X-dev and tkX.X-dev and try make menuconfig for a jazzier, and easier to use interface. Also, please read the detailed documentation in the file /usr/share/doc/kernel-source-2.4.18/README.headers.gz. . If you wish to use this package to create a custom Linux kernel, then it is suggested that you investigate the package kernel-package, which has been designed to ease the task of creating kernel image packages. Eu posso instalar e configurar(compilar) este kernel-package sem causar danos ou perder dados e configurações já feitas no sistema? Rogério. - Original Message - From: Valessio Soares de Brito [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Rogério Serafini dos Santos [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: debian-user-portuguese@lists.debian.org Sent: Thursday, July 31, 2003 10:23 PM Subject: Re: atualização de kernel de 2.2 para 2.4 ??? On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:02:24 -0300 Rogério Serafini dos Santos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bom dia! Eu tenho um computador instalado com a versão 2.2 do Debian. É possível atualizar o Kernel para 2.4 sem reinstalar tudo??? Agradeço a sua ajuda! *** .''`. Rogério Serafini dos Santos : :' : FURI - URI Campus Santiago `. `'`Santiago-RS-Brasil `- Paz Pofunda R+C *** Tipo, se for so atualizar o kernel nao vai precisar reinstalar nao... baixa com apt-get kernel-source-x.x.x e procura no google: como atualizar kernel linux :) mas se esta usando potato ( Debian 2.2 ) e quer mudar para Woody ( Debian 3.0 ) ... www.debian-br.org tem uma documentação como migrar.. facil, so atualizar source.list apt-get update apt-get dist-upgrade :) *** * .''. ps_aux Debian User http://www.valessio.ht.st * * : :' :Debian-BR http://debian-br.cipsga.org.br* * '. '' GNU/Linux Debian 3.0 unstable/testing * * '' ** ** Use um Sistema Livre! * *
Re: atualização de kernel de 2.2 para 2.4 ???
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:02:24 -0300 Rogério Serafini dos Santos [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bom dia! Eu tenho um computador instalado com a versão 2.2 do Debian. É possível atualizar o Kernel para 2.4 sem reinstalar tudo??? Agradeço a sua ajuda! *** .''`. Rogério Serafini dos Santos : :' : FURI - URI Campus Santiago `. `'`Santiago-RS-Brasil `- Paz Pofunda R+C *** Tipo, se for so atualizar o kernel nao vai precisar reinstalar nao... baixa com apt-get kernel-source-x.x.x e procura no google: como atualizar kernel linux :) mas se esta usando potato ( Debian 2.2 ) e quer mudar para Woody ( Debian 3.0 ) ... www.debian-br.org tem uma documentação como migrar.. facil, so atualizar source.list apt-get update apt-get dist-upgrade :) *** * .''. ps_aux Debian User http://www.valessio.ht.st * * : :' :Debian-BR http://debian-br.cipsga.org.br* * '. '' GNU/Linux Debian 3.0 unstable/testing * * '' ** ** Use um Sistema Livre! * *
atualização de kernel de 2.2 para 2.4 ???
Bom dia! Eu tenho um computador instalado com a versão 2.2 do Debian. É possível atualizar o Kernel para 2.4 sem reinstalar tudo??? Agradeço a sua ajuda! *** .''`. Rogério Serafini dos Santos : :' : FURI - URI Campus Santiago `. `'`Santiago-RS-Brasil `- Paz Pofunda R+C ***
Re: atualização de kernel de 2.2 para 2.4 ???
Rogério Serafini dos Santos wrote: Bom dia! Eu tenho um computador instalado com a versão 2.2 do Debian. É possível atualizar o Kernel para 2.4 sem reinstalar tudo??? Realmente existe esta necessidade? Tenho ate hoje um 386 funcionando como roteador com kernel 2.0, e nao ha nehum motivo pra trocar! Mas se voce realmente tem esta necessidade, procure no www.debian-br.org na secao de documentacao. Agradeço a sua ajuda! []'s -- Outgoing mail is certified Windows Free checked by Debian GNU/Linux http://www.debian.org. free your computer and your soul will follow... Nosso time estava na beira do precício, mas, agora, demos um passo à frente, de João Pinto, ex-jogador do Benfica.
Re: atualização de kernel de 2.2 para 2.4 ???
On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 09:02:24 -0300, Rogério Serafini dos Santos wrote: Eu tenho um computador instalado com a versão 2.2 do Debian. É possível atualizar o Kernel para 2.4 sem reinstalar tudo??? Você não está confundindo versão do núcleo com do Debian? Se você estiver com Debian 3.0, pode sim atualizar somente o núcleo e utilitários associados sem tocar nos aplicativos e dados. Vide manual do apt-get ou do dselect. -- _ Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra +41 (21) 648 11 34 / \ http://br.geocities.com./lgcdutra/ +41 (78) 778 11 34 \ / Answer to the list, not to me directly!+55 (11) 5686 2219 / \ Rate this if helpful: http://svcs.affero.net/rm.php?r=leandro
Re: Kernel 2.2 and 2.4: boot differences?
No, no; ifconfig says the interface is up and running with both kernel images. Obviously *a* tulip module is installed (one way or the other). Happens to be two different ones. I compiled tulip in to 2.4.18 whereas I don't know how the prepackaged 2.2.20-idepci worked. I'd kinda like to try the driver that shipped with 2.2.20 but I don't know how to answer configuration questions to get it insted of the driver I now have compiled into 2.4.18. I don't know the driver in 2.4.18 is malfunctioning; I know only four things that seem relevant: ifconfig is happy; netstat only reports success with 2.2.20-idepci not with my compiled 2.4.18; the base addresses used by the two tulip modules are different; the configuration files the two kernel images are booting under are the same. (Of course, the configuration files ask for different things because of what they find in the /proc directories but that is a fact I don't know how to exploit in tracking down my problem.) J Adrian Zimmer www.ossm.edu/~azimmer azimmer -- dot -- ossm.edu Bob Proulx [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/28/03 10:47PM Adrian Zimmer wrote: with 2.2.20 I get eth0: Accton EN1217/EN2242 (ADMtek Comet) rev 17 at 0xc6022000, 00:D0:59:24:04:C0, IRQ 11. eth0: MII transceiver #1 config 3000 status 786d advertising 01e1. whereas with 2.4.18 I get eth0: ADMtek Comet rev 17 at 0x1c00, 00:D0:59:24:04:C0, IRQ 11. Googling and then looking at the tulip_core.c driver shows that the tulip driver is used with this card. Did you compile the tulip driver into your kernel? Or did you compile it as a module? If as a module did you load the tulip driver in /etc/modules? If you are using the Debian tuned kernels then everything is compiled as a module and you will need to include tulip in /etc/modules. Bob -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel 2.2 and 2.4: boot differences?
On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 09:35, Adrian Zimmer wrote: No, no; ifconfig says the interface is up and running with both kernel images. Obviously *a* tulip module is installed (one way or the other). Happens to be two different ones. I compiled tulip in to 2.4.18 whereas I don't know how the prepackaged 2.2.20-idepci worked. I'd kinda like to try the driver that shipped with 2.2.20 but I don't know how to answer configuration questions to get it insted of the driver I now have compiled into 2.4.18. I don't know the driver in 2.4.18 is malfunctioning; I know only four things that seem relevant: ifconfig is happy; netstat only reports success with 2.2.20-idepci not with my compiled 2.4.18; the base addresses used by the two tulip modules are different; Maybe this is an issue for the tulip*.c maintainer? You've looked at lspci, right? the configuration files the two kernel images are booting under are the same. (Of course, the configuration files ask for different things because of what they find in the /proc directories but that is a fact I don't know how to exploit in tracking down my problem.) J Adrian Zimmer www.ossm.edu/~azimmer azimmer -- dot -- ossm.edu Bob Proulx [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/28/03 10:47PM Adrian Zimmer wrote: with 2.2.20 I get eth0: Accton EN1217/EN2242 (ADMtek Comet) rev 17 at 0xc6022000, 00:D0:59:24:04:C0, IRQ 11. eth0: MII transceiver #1 config 3000 status 786d advertising 01e1. whereas with 2.4.18 I get eth0: ADMtek Comet rev 17 at 0x1c00, 00:D0:59:24:04:C0, IRQ 11. Googling and then looking at the tulip_core.c driver shows that the tulip driver is used with this card. Did you compile the tulip driver into your kernel? Or did you compile it as a module? If as a module did you load the tulip driver in /etc/modules? If you are using the Debian tuned kernels then everything is compiled as a module and you will need to include tulip in /etc/modules. Bob -- +-+ | Ron Johnson, Jr.Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Jefferson, LA USA | | | | I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian | | because I hate vegetables!| |unknown | +-+ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel 2.2 and 2.4: boot differences?
As to lspci, I did take your advice but the results seemed to tell me nothing useful. Here they are is. Maybe, you will see something interesting: From 2.2.20-idepci 00:10.0 Ethernet controller: Accton Technology Corporation EN-1216 Ethernet Adapter (rev 11) Subsystem: Accton Technology Corporation: Unknown device 2242 Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 64, IRQ 11 I/O ports at 1c00 Memory at e800 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) Capabilities: [c0] Power Management version 2 From 2.4.18 (compiled by me) 00:10.0 Ethernet controller: Accton Technology Corporation EN-1216 Ethernet Adapter (rev 11) Subsystem: Accton Technology Corporation: Unknown device 2242 Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 64, IRQ 11 I/O ports at 1c00 [size=256] Memory at e800 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=1K] Expansion ROM at unassigned [disabled] [size=128K] Capabilities: [c0] Power Management version 2 I still tend to think the problem is with what the configuration is doing *after* tulip gets set up --- right where I would have thought things would be running the same for both kernel images. Can't claim I have much relevant experience to support that intuition though. J Adrian Zimmer www.ossm.edu/~azimmer azimmer -- dot -- ossm.edu Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/29/03 10:13AM On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 09:35, Adrian Zimmer wrote: No, no; ifconfig says the interface is up and running with both kernel images. Obviously *a* tulip module is installed (one way or the other). Happens to be two different ones. I compiled tulip in to 2.4.18 whereas I don't know how the prepackaged 2.2.20-idepci worked. I'd kinda like to try the driver that shipped with 2.2.20 but I don't know how to answer configuration questions to get it insted of the driver I now have compiled into 2.4.18. I don't know the driver in 2.4.18 is malfunctioning; I know only four things that seem relevant: ifconfig is happy; netstat only reports success with 2.2.20-idepci not with my compiled 2.4.18; the base addresses used by the two tulip modules are different; Maybe this is an issue for the tulip*.c maintainer? You've looked at lspci, right? the configuration files the two kernel images are booting under are the same. (Of course, the configuration files ask for different things because of what they find in the /proc directories but that is a fact I don't know how to exploit in tracking down my problem.) J Adrian Zimmer www.ossm.edu/~azimmer azimmer -- dot -- ossm.edu Bob Proulx [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/28/03 10:47PM Adrian Zimmer wrote: with 2.2.20 I get eth0: Accton EN1217/EN2242 (ADMtek Comet) rev 17 at 0xc6022000, 00:D0:59:24:04:C0, IRQ 11. eth0: MII transceiver #1 config 3000 status 786d advertising 01e1. whereas with 2.4.18 I get eth0: ADMtek Comet rev 17 at 0x1c00, 00:D0:59:24:04:C0, IRQ 11. Googling and then looking at the tulip_core.c driver shows that the tulip driver is used with this card. Did you compile the tulip driver into your kernel? Or did you compile it as a module? If as a module did you load the tulip driver in /etc/modules? If you are using the Debian tuned kernels then everything is compiled as a module and you will need to include tulip in /etc/modules. Bob -- +-+ | Ron Johnson, Jr.Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Jefferson, LA USA | | | | I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian | | because I hate vegetables!| |unknown | +-+ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel 2.2 and 2.4: boot differences?
On Tue, 2003-07-29 at 11:12, Adrian Zimmer wrote: As to lspci, I did take your advice but the results seemed to tell me nothing useful. Here they are is. Maybe, you will see something interesting: From 2.2.20-idepci 00:10.0 Ethernet controller: Accton Technology Corporation EN-1216 Ethernet Adapter (rev 11) Subsystem: Accton Technology Corporation: Unknown device 2242 Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 64, IRQ 11 I/O ports at 1c00 Memory at e800 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) Capabilities: [c0] Power Management version 2 From 2.4.18 (compiled by me) 00:10.0 Ethernet controller: Accton Technology Corporation EN-1216 Ethernet Adapter (rev 11) Subsystem: Accton Technology Corporation: Unknown device 2242 Flags: bus master, medium devsel, latency 64, IRQ 11 I/O ports at 1c00 [size=256] Memory at e800 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=1K] Expansion ROM at unassigned [disabled] [size=128K] Capabilities: [c0] Power Management version 2 I still tend to think the problem is with what the configuration is doing *after* tulip gets set up --- right where I would have thought things would be running the same for both kernel images. Can't claim I have much relevant experience to support that intuition though. From your email this morning: the base addresses used by the two tulip modules are different From what I see, the base address is the same under both kernels: IRQ = 11 Base address = 1c00 Where do you get the info saying there are different base addresses? What's the output of netstat -a? (Since for me it's 186 lines, why not send it to me directly as an attachment?) The output from ifconfig might help also. [big snippage] -- +-+ | Ron Johnson, Jr.Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Jefferson, LA USA | | | | I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian | | because I hate vegetables!| |unknown | +-+ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Kernel 2.2 and 2.4: boot differences?
I have version 2.2.20 (idepci downloaded) running OK (at runlevel 2).
I have version 2.4.18 (compiled myself under 2.2.20) running sort-of OK
(again runlevel 2).
One difference is that my self-configured/compiled version isn't establishing a
network connection. Here are my thoughts as to why --
my thinking isn't good enough yet:
Something is different about the way these are booting up. Since
I see no error messages in /var/log/dmesg (or nothing I recognized as
an error message) and since the same /etc configuration files are
being used, I'm thinking the difference must come from tests of things
in the /proc system. So grep for /proc within the files found in
/etc/*.conf
/etc/init.d/*
The list appears below. Am I correct that my problem is probably
findable by considering this list? The only thing that jumps to
my eyes in it are the entries for the nfs I didn't compile support
for nfs into my 2.4.18 image
/etc/init.d/checkroot.sh:# Mount /proc. If /proc/1 exists, but /proc is not mounted,
/etc/init.d/checkroot.sh:if [ -d /proc/1 ]
/etc/init.d/checkroot.sh: rootino=`ls -lid /proc | sed -ne 's/^
*\([0-9]\+\).*$/\1/p'`
/etc/init.d/checkroot.sh: echo WARNING: found junk under the /proc
mountpoint
/etc/init.d/checkroot.sh:[ $doproc = yes ] mount -n /proc
/etc/init.d/checkroot.sh: if [ $swap_on_md = yes ] grep -qs resync
/proc/mdstat
/etc/init.d/checkroot.sh: mount -f /proc
/etc/init.d/checkroot.sh: [ $devfs ] grep -q '^devfs /dev' /proc/mounts
mount -f $devfs
/etc/init.d/console-screen.sh:if [ `grep -c devfs /proc/filesystems` -a -d /dev/vc
]; then
/etc/init.d/console-screen.sh: if [ -f /proc/fb ]; then
/etc/init.d/devpts.sh:devpts_avail=`grep -qci '[[:space:]]devpts' /proc/filesystems
|| true`
/etc/init.d/devpts.sh:devpts_mounted=`grep -qci '/dev/pts' /proc/mounts || true`
/etc/init.d/devpts.sh:devfs_mounted=`grep -qci '[[:space:]]/dev[[:space:]].*devfs'
/proc/mounts || true`
/etc/init.d/halt:if grep -qs '^md.*active' /proc/mdstat
/etc/init.d/klogd:cmd=`cat /proc/$pid/cmdline | tr \000 \n|head -1`
/etc/init.d/modutils:[ -f /proc/modules ] || exit 0
/etc/init.d/mountall.sh:if grep -qs resync /proc/mdstat
/etc/init.d/networking:if [ -e /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/all/rp_filter ]; then
/etc/init.d/networking:for f in /proc/sys/net/ipv4/conf/*/rp_filter; do
/etc/init.d/networking:if [ -e /proc/net/ip_input ]; then
/etc/init.d/networking:if [ -e /proc/net/ip_fwchains ]; then
/etc/init.d/networking:if [ -e /proc/net/ip_fwtables ]; then
/etc/init.d/networking:if [ -e /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward ]; then
/etc/init.d/networking:echo 1 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/ip_forward
/etc/init.d/networking:if [ -e /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies ]; then
/etc/init.d/networking:echo 1 /proc/sys/net/ipv4/tcp_syncookies
/etc/init.d/networking:if sed -n 's/^[^ ]* \([^ ]*\) \([^ ]*\) .*$/\1 \2/p'
/proc/mounts |
/etc/init.d/networking:elif sed -n 's/^[^ ]* \([^ ]*\) \([^ ]*\) .*$/\1 \2/p'
/proc/mounts |
/etc/init.d/networking: elif sed -n 's/^[^ ]* \([^ ]*\) \([^ ]*\) .*$/\2/p'
/proc/mounts |
/etc/init.d/nfs-common:if test -f /proc/ksyms
/etc/init.d/nfs-common:grep -q lockdctl /proc/ksyms || NEED_LOCKD=no
/etc/init.d/pcmcia: grep -q pcmcia /proc/devices
/etc/init.d/pcmcia: if grep -q ds /proc/modules ; then
/etc/init.d/procps.sh:# /etc/init.d/procps: Set kernel variables from /etc/sysctl.conf
/etc/init.d/procps.sh: echo Usage: /etc/init.d/procps.sh
{start|stop|reload|restart} 2
/etc/init.d/sysklogd:cmd=`cat /proc/$pid/cmdline | tr \000 \n|head -1`
/etc/init.d/umountfs:# We leave /proc mounted.
J Adrian Zimmer
www.ossm.edu/~azimmer
azimmer --at-- ossm.edu
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel 2.2 and 2.4: boot differences?
On Mon, 2003-07-28 at 15:46, Adrian Zimmer wrote: I have version 2.2.20 (idepci downloaded) running OK (at runlevel 2). I have version 2.4.18 (compiled myself under 2.2.20) running sort-of OK (again runlevel 2). One difference is that my self-configured/compiled version isn't establishing a network connection. Here are my thoughts as to why -- my thinking isn't good enough yet: Something is different about the way these are booting up. Since I see no error messages in /var/log/dmesg (or nothing I recognized as an error message) and since the same /etc configuration files are being used, I'm thinking the difference must come from tests of things in the /proc system. So grep for /proc within the files found in First thing is: $ dmesg|grep -n eth For example, here's my output: $ dmesg|grep -n eth 233:eth0: VIA VT86C100A Rhine at 0xa000, 00:80:c8:e9:a7:b8, IRQ 4. 234:eth0: MII PHY found at address 8, status 0x782d advertising 05e1 Link 4de1. 275:eth0: Setting full-duplex based on MII #8 link partner capability of 4de1. Another good preliminary diagnostic tool is lspci and it's -v option. In my case: $ lspci | grep [eE]ther 00:0a.0 Ethernet controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT86C100A [Rhine] (rev 06) $ lspci -v -s 00:0a.0 00:0a.0 Ethernet controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT86C100A [Rhine] (rev 06) Subsystem: D-Link System Inc DFE-530TX rev A Flags: bus master, stepping, medium devsel, latency 32, IRQ 4 I/O ports at a000 [size=128] Memory at df00 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128] Expansion ROM at unassigned [disabled] [size=64K] Ron -- +-+ | Ron Johnson, Jr.Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Jefferson, LA USA | | | | I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian | | because I hate vegetables!| |unknown | +-+ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel 2.2 and 2.4: boot differences?
Thanks, I had already seen in dmesg and ifconfig that the ethernet was configured. There is a difference that I had not thought consequential: with 2.2.20 I get eth0: Accton EN1217/EN2242 (ADMtek Comet) rev 17 at 0xc6022000, 00:D0:59:24:04:C0, IRQ 11. eth0: MII transceiver #1 config 3000 status 786d advertising 01e1. whereas with 2.4.18 I get eth0: ADMtek Comet rev 17 at 0x1c00, 00:D0:59:24:04:C0, IRQ 11. Either way ifconfig says I have eth0 configured bid I NOW NOTICE that the base address reported by ifconfig is not the same. Perhaps the driver for 2.4.18 got it wrong? How can I force 2.4.18 to use the other driver? J Adrian Zimmer www.ossm.edu/~azimmer azimmer --dot-- ossm.edu Ron Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/28/03 04:07PM On Mon, 2003-07-28 at 15:46, Adrian Zimmer wrote: I have version 2.2.20 (idepci downloaded) running OK (at runlevel 2). I have version 2.4.18 (compiled myself under 2.2.20) running sort-of OK (again runlevel 2). One difference is that my self-configured/compiled version isn't establishing a network connection. Here are my thoughts as to why -- my thinking isn't good enough yet: Something is different about the way these are booting up. Since I see no error messages in /var/log/dmesg (or nothing I recognized as an error message) and since the same /etc configuration files are being used, I'm thinking the difference must come from tests of things in the /proc system. So grep for /proc within the files found in First thing is: $ dmesg|grep -n eth For example, here's my output: $ dmesg|grep -n eth 233:eth0: VIA VT86C100A Rhine at 0xa000, 00:80:c8:e9:a7:b8, IRQ 4. 234:eth0: MII PHY found at address 8, status 0x782d advertising 05e1 Link 4de1. 275:eth0: Setting full-duplex based on MII #8 link partner capability of 4de1. Another good preliminary diagnostic tool is lspci and it's -v option. In my case: $ lspci | grep [eE]ther 00:0a.0 Ethernet controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT86C100A [Rhine] (rev 06) $ lspci -v -s 00:0a.0 00:0a.0 Ethernet controller: VIA Technologies, Inc. VT86C100A [Rhine] (rev 06) Subsystem: D-Link System Inc DFE-530TX rev A Flags: bus master, stepping, medium devsel, latency 32, IRQ 4 I/O ports at a000 [size=128] Memory at df00 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=128] Expansion ROM at unassigned [disabled] [size=64K] Ron -- +-+ | Ron Johnson, Jr.Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | | Jefferson, LA USA | | | | I'm not a vegetarian because I love animals, I'm a vegetarian | | because I hate vegetables!| |unknown | +-+ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel 2.2 and 2.4: boot differences?
Adrian Zimmer wrote: with 2.2.20 I get eth0: Accton EN1217/EN2242 (ADMtek Comet) rev 17 at 0xc6022000, 00:D0:59:24:04:C0, IRQ 11. eth0: MII transceiver #1 config 3000 status 786d advertising 01e1. whereas with 2.4.18 I get eth0: ADMtek Comet rev 17 at 0x1c00, 00:D0:59:24:04:C0, IRQ 11. Googling and then looking at the tulip_core.c driver shows that the tulip driver is used with this card. Did you compile the tulip driver into your kernel? Or did you compile it as a module? If as a module did you load the tulip driver in /etc/modules? If you are using the Debian tuned kernels then everything is compiled as a module and you will need to include tulip in /etc/modules. Bob pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Kernel 2.2. a 2.4
Witam. Mam dwa serwery na Debianie, oba mają kernele 2.2 z OpenWall-em. Ostatnio wykryto kilka błędów w jądrze, ale z security-announce-u zrozumiałem że błędy te dotyczą wersji 2.4. Czy mam rację?? Pytanie, czy na serwerze produkcyjnym opłaca się zmieniać jądro z 2.2. na 2.4 i co mi to da (stabilność ponad wszystko)? I czy zmiana jądra powinna być podyktowana odkrytymi błędami, czy bugi te są tylko w 2.4. Nie chciałbym wywoływać burzy o wyższości 2.4 nad 2.2 czy odwrotnie, chodzi mi raczej z rzeczowe za i przeciw :-). Pozdrawiam Szanowne Grono. Gąsior
Re: Kernel 2.2. a 2.4
Nie chciałbym wywoływać burzy o wyższości 2.4 nad 2.2 czy odwrotnie, chodzi mi raczej z rzeczowe za i przeciw :-). moim zdaniem jesli masz 2.2 i nie brakuje ci jakiejs konkretnej funkcjonalnosci ktora jest dostepna w 2.4 a nie jest w 2.2 (np. iptables, LVM) to nie warto sie przesiadac. -- Michał Łodziński --= IKARIA.pl =-
Re: Kernel 2.2. a 2.4
On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 10:30:08AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ostatnio wykryto kilka błędów w jądrze, ale z security-announce-u zrozumiałem że błędy te dotyczą wersji 2.4. Czy mam rację?? Nie. Niektóre z nich dotyczą też serii 2.2.x Marcin -- Marcin Owsiany [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://marcin.owsiany.pl/ GnuPG: 1024D/60F41216 FE67 DA2D 0ACA FC5E 3F75 D6F6 3A0D 8AA0 60F4 1216
Re: De 2.2 para 2.4
Mas se você quiser realmante recompilar o kernel, veja as instruções no focalinux. apt-cache search focalinux Escolha qual focalinux você quer e dê: apt-get install o focalinux que voce escolheu Eduardo [EMAIL PROTECTED]Para: A-melhor-de-todas debian-user-portuguese@lists.debian.org ra.com.br cc: Enviado Por: Assunto: Re: De 2.2 para 2.4 Eduardo Rocha Costa [EMAIL PROTECTED] ra.com.br 29/03/2003 04:49 ---wanderson wrote: Alo pessoal! Podem me ensinar como faço para atualizar meu Linux de 2.2 (instalado por padrão) para a versão 2.4.18? Já baixei o kernel-source e kernel-header. Do que mais preciso? O modem novo que estou usando só vai funcionar (segundo me orientaram) em um linux 2.4.x. Aceito links de apostilas/tutoriais :-) []s e obrigado. Acho que tem um jeito mais facil se vc não quizer compilar seu kernel... simplesmente de o download do kernel-image-2.4.18 (acho que o nome todo é este) e depois instale, vc devera colocar uma linha no seu lilo e pronto já esta funcionando... -- Please do not CC me! Get a proper mailer instead: www.mutt.org .''`. : :' : `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system Eduardo Rocha Costa [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LWN: Ptrace vulnerability in 2.2 and 2.4 kernels
Rob Weir said:
Hmm, I'm not really sure. I've read the discussion on lkml, but a lot of
it went over my head. I think the answer is 'yes, for this
particular one', but the root issue here could also lead to other
vulnerabilities. I'm still following that discussion, so I'll post if I
ever figure it out myself.
at least in the 2.2.x series this is the case. the patch is a 6 line
patch to kernel/kmod.c which is part of CONFIG_KMOD, which cannot be
enabled if modules are disabled. I always have CONFIG_KMOD disabled
anyways since I hate the kernel trying to load things it thinks I want
it to load, so I am not vulnerable.
not sure about 2.4.x I haven't looked at the patch, but I suspect it
is probably the same..
patch for 2.2.x(diff'd against 2.2.19):
--- kernel/kmod.c Tue Mar 18 14:10:18 2003
+++ kernel/kmod.c Tue Mar 18 14:11:40 2003
@@ -155,12 +155,18 @@
atomic_dec(kmod_concurrent);
return -ENOMEM;
}
+ {
+ int old=current-dumpable;
+ current-dumpable=0;/* block ptrace */
pid = kernel_thread(exec_modprobe, (void*) module_name, 0);
if (pid 0) {
printk(KERN_ERR request_module[%s]: fork failed, errno %d\n,
module_name, -pid);
atomic_dec(kmod_concurrent);
+ current-dumpable=old;
return pid;
+ }
+ current-dumpable=old;
}
/* Block everything but SIGKILL/SIGSTOP */
nate
(haven't been following the thread been busy playing with my zaurus
for the past few days)
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: LWN: Ptrace vulnerability in 2.2 and 2.4 kernels
-Original Message- From: Shri Shrikumar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, March 29, 2003 7:39 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: LWN: Ptrace vulnerability in 2.2 and 2.4 kernels Does that mean that a kernel that has module loading disabled is not vulnerable to this exploit ? According to one of the original posts on this (from Alan maybe? can't remember), there are three or four cases in which this wouldn't be exploitable. A kernel which doesn't use modules is one of those cases. The kernel on my firewall is monolithic and I was not successfully when attempting to gain root access using exploits already made public. YMMV. j. -- Jeremy L. Gaddis [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gaddis.org -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: De 2.2 para 2.4
---wanderson wrote: Alo pessoal! Podem me ensinar como faço para atualizar meu Linux de 2.2 (instalado por padrão) para a versão 2.4.18? Já baixei o kernel-source e kernel-header. Do que mais preciso? O modem novo que estou usando só vai funcionar (segundo me orientaram) em um linux 2.4.x. Aceito links de apostilas/tutoriais :-) []s e obrigado. Acho que tem um jeito mais facil se vc não quizer compilar seu kernel... simplesmente de o download do kernel-image-2.4.18 (acho que o nome todo é este) e depois instale, vc devera colocar uma linha no seu lilo e pronto já esta funcionando... -- Please do not CC me! Get a proper mailer instead: www.mutt.org .''`. : :' : `. `'` `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing a system Eduardo Rocha Costa [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: De 2.2 para 2.4
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 05:59, wanderson wrote: Podem me ensinar como faço para atualizar meu Linux de 2.2 (instalado por padrão) para a versão 2.4.18? Já baixei o kernel-source e kernel-header. Do que mais preciso? O modem novo que estou usando só vai funcionar (segundo me orientaram) em um linux 2.4.x. /usr/share/doc/kernel-source-2.4.XX/debian.README.gz Mas você pode também instalar o kernel-image, pelo menos se estiver na testing. -- _ Leandro Guimarães Faria Corsetti Dutra+41 (21) 648 11 34 / \ Lausanne, Vaud, Suisse+41 (78) 778 11 34 \ / Brasil+55 (11) 5686 2219 / \ http://geocities.yahoo.com.br/lgcdutra/
Re: LWN: Ptrace vulnerability in 2.2 and 2.4 kernels
On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 03:54, Rob Weir wrote: On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 11:12:25AM +0300, DouRiX wrote: DouRiX wrote: Hi everybody, Does someone know where is debian about this issue ? http://lwn.net/Articles/25669/ I see that there is already an update but only for mips, do you know why ? No, that is odd. Another short-term fix is to 'echo SaveMeJeebus /proc/sys/kernel/modprobe', which disables the module loading that is part of the problem. Does that mean that a kernel that has module loading disabled is not vulnerable to this exploit ? Thanks, Shri -- Shri Shrikumar U R Byte Solutions I.T. ConsultantEdinburgh, Scotland Tel: 0845 644 4745 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Web: www.urbyte.com signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: LWN: Ptrace vulnerability in 2.2 and 2.4 kernels
On Sat, Mar 29, 2003 at 12:38:41PM +, Shri Shrikumar wrote: On Sat, 2003-03-29 at 03:54, Rob Weir wrote: No, that is odd. Another short-term fix is to 'echo SaveMeJeebus /proc/sys/kernel/modprobe', which disables the module loading that is part of the problem. Does that mean that a kernel that has module loading disabled is not vulnerable to this exploit ? Hmm, I'm not really sure. I've read the discussion on lkml, but a lot of it went over my head. I think the answer is 'yes, for this particular one', but the root issue here could also lead to other vulnerabilities. I'm still following that discussion, so I'll post if I ever figure it out myself. -- Rob Weir [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ertius.org/ If I want a CC, I'll ask for one! | Do I *look* like I want another damn war? pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
De 2.2 para 2.4
Alo pessoal! Podem me ensinar como faço para atualizar meu Linux de 2.2 (instalado por padrão) para a versão 2.4.18? Já baixei o kernel-source e kernel-header. Do que mais preciso? O modem novo que estou usando só vai funcionar (segundo me orientaram) em um linux 2.4.x. Aceito links de apostilas/tutoriais :-) []s e obrigado. WDM.
Re: LWN: Ptrace vulnerability in 2.2 and 2.4 kernels
On Fri, 28 Mar 2003 10:38:14 +0300 DouRiX [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everybody, Does someone know where is debian about this issue ? http://lwn.net/Articles/25669/ I already have the patched 2.4.20 kernel, so I know it's available. I don't know about the others, but I doubt it will take long. Kevin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: LWN: Ptrace vulnerability in 2.2 and 2.4 kernels
On Fri, Mar 28, 2003 at 11:12:25AM +0300, DouRiX wrote: DouRiX wrote: Hi everybody, Does someone know where is debian about this issue ? http://lwn.net/Articles/25669/ I see that there is already an update but only for mips, do you know why ? No, that is odd. Another short-term fix is to 'echo SaveMeJeebus /proc/sys/kernel/modprobe', which disables the module loading that is part of the problem. -- Rob Weir [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://ertius.org/ If I want a CC, I'll ask for one! | Do I *look* like I want another damn war? pgp0.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: kernel przesiadka z 2.2 na 2.4
Dnia 13:56 02.12.2002, Jarosław Łęcki napisał(a): Witam. Czy moze ktos aktualizowal kernel (z 2.2 compakt na 2.4 ) poprzez apt-get install jak jest z bezbolesnaoscia tej operacji ?? Czy np. bez problemu zaskoczy jesli mam dyski SCSI ?? a czemu miałaby być bolesna? ja kompilowałem ze żródeł i wszystko spox. na woodym. Obawiam sie troche recznej konfiguracji :) do odważnych świat należy :) pozdr. -- --=== Kamil Strzelecki = esac at ( wp.pl || poczta.onet.pl ) ===-- I statek kosmiczny Ziemia, ten wspaniały, krwawy cyrk, kontynuował swój trwający cztery miliardy lat lot po spiralnej orbicie wokół słońca.
Re: upgrade kernel from 2.2 to 2.4
On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 12:29:02PM +0330, Arash Bijanzadeh wrote: I got to upgrade my kernel from 2.2 to 2.4 It is ok but because 2.4 using initrd.img so there is some problems init proccess. I tgives some errors about ReadOnly file system and also couldn't find mtab. Anybody have information about this matter? i just did that on my server at work -- when you do the install, lots of text flies by and of course some of it is important. TIP: you can scroll up and down your console buffer [and xterm or rxvt windows] using shift-pageUp and shift-pageDown. there's a line you need in your /etc/lilo.conf inside the image=/vmlinuz section: initrd=/initrd.img my whole stanza now looks like this -- pretty plain vanilla: image=/vmlinuz label=Linux read-only initrd=/initrd.img # restricted # alias=1 of course, the install process should also make sure that the file /initrd.img exists -- here's mine: # ls -l /initrd.img lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root initrd.img - /boot/initrd.img-2.4.18-k6 the file it's linked to will depend on your architecture -- mine is an AMD K6. and whenever you munge lilo.conf, be sure to run lilo afterwards, which reads the config file and actually writes the boot info to your disk. of course, there may be other gremlins loose in your situation, but this is something easy to try. -- I use Debian/GNU Linux version 2.2; Linux server 2.2.17 #1 Sun Jun 25 09:24:41 EST 2000 i586 unknown DEBIAN NEWBIE TIP #42 from Pietro Cagnoni [EMAIL PROTECTED] and Kent [EMAIL PROTECTED] : Would you like to DISABLE CONTROL-ALT-DEL? Piece of cake. Just comment the line out in /etc/inittab # What to do when CTRL-ALT-DEL is pressed. ca:12345:ctrlaltdel:/sbin/shutdown -t1 -a -r now and then kill -HUP 1 to have init re-read the file. Also see http://newbieDoc.sourceForge.net/ ... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: upgrade kernel from 2.2 to 2.4
On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 12:29:02PM +0330, Arash Bijanzadeh wrote: I got to upgrade my kernel from 2.2 to 2.4 It is ok but because 2.4 using initrd.img so there is some problems init proccess. I tgives some errors about ReadOnly file system and also couldn't find mtab. Anybody have information about this matter? You need to configure lilo or grub to handle the initrd. 2.4 kernels don't use mtab, so you can ignore that message. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: upgrade kernel from 2.2 to 2.4
I know this man! I did all but there is something in init script I guess. Don't you get warnings about readonly root while booting? I do get a lot and I wanna get rid of 'em. And the errors is understandable. the old 2.2 mounts /dev/hdax as root and could write te log files on it, but the 2.4 mount initrd.img as root so meanwhile the changing the root to actuale one it couldn't write on it. Any tips? On Wed, Oct 23, 2002 at 12:29:02PM +0330, Arash Bijanzadeh wrote: I got to upgrade my kernel from 2.2 to 2.4 It is ok but because 2.4 using initrd.img so there is some problems init proccess. I tgives some errors about ReadOnly file system and also couldn't find mtab. Anybody have information about this matter? i just did that on my server at work -- when you do the install, lots of text flies by and of course some of it is important. TIP: you can scroll up and down your console buffer [and xterm or rxvt windows] using shift-pageUp and shift-pageDown. there's a line you need in your /etc/lilo.conf inside the image=/vmlinuz section: initrd=/initrd.img my whole stanza now looks like this -- pretty plain vanilla: image=/vmlinuz label=Linux read-only initrd=/initrd.img # restricted # alias=1 of course, the install process should also make sure that the file /initrd.img exists -- here's mine: # ls -l /initrd.img lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root initrd.img - /boot/initrd.img-2.4.18-k6 the file it's linked to will depend on your architecture -- mine is an AMD K6. and whenever you munge lilo.conf, be sure to run lilo afterwards, which reads the config file and actually writes the boot info to your disk. of course, there may be other gremlins loose in your situation, but this is something easy to try. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel 2.2 to 2.4 on a laptop
On Mon, 14 Oct 2002 14:44:57 -0700 Eric Richardson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I did a web page that kindof summarizes the differences between 2.2 and 2.4 on a laptop. http://www.milagrosoft.com/products/software/debian-woody.html I will give this a try at the weekend! Thanks very much -- ___ _ Keith O'Connell. -o) Maidstone, Kent. (UK) /\\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel 2.2 to 2.4 on a laptop
Keith O'Connell wrote: Hi, I have a problem with my laptop which I would appreciate some guidance with. It is a Dell Inspiron 3700 (hardly cutting edge now!) I installed Woody on it with the default 2.2 kernel and the various packages I want and it runs fine. I then use dselect to install the kernel-image-2.4.18-5, and all the dependencies. When I reboot the machine the pcmcia network card is not used and no network link is made. The laptop is perfect under 2.2. This is the same process I use to install Woody and upgrade to 2.4 on my desktop and that runs 2.4 perfectly. The laptop will run 2.4, but only in isolation from the outside world. Has anyone else had this problem? can anyone offer suggestions as to why, and where to look for a solution? Keith Hi Keith, I did a web page that kindof summarizes the differences between 2.2 and 2.4 on a laptop. http://www.milagrosoft.com/products/software/debian-woody.html Hope it helps, Eric -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel 2.2 to 2.4 on a laptop
On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 02:11:13PM +0100, Keith O'Connell wrote: I have a problem with my laptop which I would appreciate some guidance with. It is a Dell Inspiron 3700 (hardly cutting edge now!) I installed Woody on it with the default 2.2 kernel and the various packages I want and it runs fine. I then use dselect to install the kernel-image-2.4.18-5, and all the dependencies. When I reboot the machine the pcmcia network card is not used and no network link is made. Have you installed hotplug and the appropriate pcmcia-modules packages? -- Seneca [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Kernel 2.2 to 2.4 on a laptop
On Sun, 13 Oct 2002 10:29:34 -0400 Seneca [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Oct 13, 2002 at 02:11:13PM +0100, Keith O'Connell wrote: I have a problem with my laptop which I would appreciate some guidance with. It is a Dell Inspiron 3700 (hardly cutting edge now!) I installed Woody on it with the default 2.2 kernel and the various packages I want and it runs fine. I then use dselect to install the kernel-image-2.4.18-5, and all the dependencies. When I reboot the machine the pcmcia network card is not used and no network link is made. Have you installed hotplug and the appropriate pcmcia-modules packages? Yes, I have both installed! -- ___ _ Keith O'Connell. -o) Maidstone, Kent. (UK) /\\ [EMAIL PROTECTED] _\_v -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.2 vs 2.4 kernels (OT)
I think it works out well the way Debian presents it. Individuals are free to install the 2.4 version, and in so doing help to stablize it. I would think that business would likely run the stable version, to minimize chances of failure. --- Reid Gilman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think Debian calls one release stable because although the newer kernels and packages may be fairly stable, anything in a stable release should be crash-proof. No security holes should be present and it should be usable on mission critical systems. I wouldn't want my system running on a Fortune 500 company's server because its always a work in progress. The stable distro is pretty much finished and it works. On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 19:52, Mark Roach wrote: On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 17:20, Reid Gilman wrote: The Debian stable release is that, stable. It is not supposed to have the latest and greatest features, if you want to get the 2.4.x kernels (which in my experience are perfectly stable) you can, or you can get the testing or unstable distro. But that's why Debian has three distros. I am curious, I have heard both explanations at different times regarding the meaning of stable... some people have said that only stable versions of software are (or should be) included while others have suggested that the term 'stable' applies to the packaging/dependencies Does debian policy indicate the 'One True Definition' of 'stable'? Not trying to start flames (I swear!), just curious -Mark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] ATTACHMENT part 2 application/pgp-signature name=signature.asc __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.2 vs 2.4 kernels
quote who=Nick Jacobs Can someone explain (or supply a pointer to an explanation of) what is wrong with the 2.4 kernel, that debian plans to continue offering the 2.2 kernel with woody? Several other distros have been shipping with 2.4 exclusively for over a year, surely most of the bugs have been shaken out? its a matter of opinion.. opinion I do not trust the 2.4 kernel yet. If there was something in it that I absolutely had to have then i would use it. But only if I could not work around the problem by getting different hardware or trying to do the task in a different way first. 2.4.18 has been said by many to be a good starting point(sorry i can't provide references, ive just seen it mentioned a few times in various places). sort of the real 2.4.0. I tend to agree, I have used 2.4.18 on SusE 8(i think it uses 2.4.18) and it seems halfway decent. but it won't make it onto any of my serious servers or workstations. Many people(seems many on this list, or at least many of the active posters) like to live on the edge with the 2.4 kernel, or even 2.5 kernel, running debian unstable ..etc. I used to like to live on the edge too, back in the 2.1.x days ..i ran slackware i think at the time and upgraded libc manually. but now i have gotten to the point where i just want my system to work well. I don't want to have to debug a bad package or a kernel bug. i want to set it and forget it(more or less). i like to spend my time on learning new things rather then fixing old problems. that said, I have no problem what kernel debian ships with, the first thing i do on my systems is put in a custom kernel anyways, so provided the kernel works long enough to boot the system and install thats fine by me. 2.2.19 is the most solid linux kernel I have used to date. My workstation at work which I hammer on 5 days a week was up for more then 380 days before a 2 hour power outage killed it(UPS only lasted for 30minutes). I have dozens of other servers with 6-10 months of uptime. I'm sure some 2.4.x kernels do the same, but it seemed at least until 2.4.18 that every release 2.4.x that came out seemed to have some serious fix(I read kernel traffic every week). 2.2 had this problem for a while too. 2.2.11 was a nightmare, the memory management went to hell and didn't recover for another 6 months at 2.2.15, then there were some security problems in 2.2.15 and i think 2.2.17, there is even a minor security problem with the NAT code in 2.2.19 i beleive. nothing like the 2.2.15 rootable problem though. I think there is a significant amount of people out there like me who like debian specifically because it is stable. The 2.4 kernel does not offer many compelling reasons to upgrade for most systems, which is good, that tells me linux is mature when the latest and greatest is not required. as for if most of the bugs are worked out.. since some people(myself included) think 2.4.18 is a starting point for 2.4, I will give 2.4.x another 6-8 months at least before i think about deploying it on my servers(even my personal ones). i've told people before...I have personally used about a dozen different linux and unix systems(more or less), on half a dozen different hardware platforms. and for low end systems(1/2 CPU with less then 2GB ram) debian has been the most solid and easily maintained of all of them for me. /opinion nate debian user since 2.0(hamm ?) was released slackware user before that -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.2 vs 2.4 kernels (OT)
I agree, I think it works very well the way Debian does it. On Tue, 2002-06-25 at 00:20, Larry Smith wrote: I think it works out well the way Debian presents it. Individuals are free to install the 2.4 version, and in so doing help to stablize it. I would think that business would likely run the stable version, to minimize chances of failure. --- Reid Gilman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think Debian calls one release stable because although the newer kernels and packages may be fairly stable, anything in a stable release should be crash-proof. No security holes should be present and it should be usable on mission critical systems. I wouldn't want my system running on a Fortune 500 company's server because its always a work in progress. The stable distro is pretty much finished and it works. On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 19:52, Mark Roach wrote: On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 17:20, Reid Gilman wrote: The Debian stable release is that, stable. It is not supposed to have the latest and greatest features, if you want to get the 2.4.x kernels (which in my experience are perfectly stable) you can, or you can get the testing or unstable distro. But that's why Debian has three distros. I am curious, I have heard both explanations at different times regarding the meaning of stable... some people have said that only stable versions of software are (or should be) included while others have suggested that the term 'stable' applies to the packaging/dependencies Does debian policy indicate the 'One True Definition' of 'stable'? Not trying to start flames (I swear!), just curious -Mark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] ATTACHMENT part 2 application/pgp-signature name=signature.asc __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: 2.2 vs 2.4 kernels
On Tue, 2002-06-25 at 00:38, nate wrote: quote who=Nick Jacobs Can someone explain (or supply a pointer to an explanation of) what is wrong with the 2.4 kernel, that debian plans to continue offering the 2.2 kernel with woody? Several other distros have been shipping with 2.4 exclusively for over a year, surely most of the bugs have been shaken out? its a matter of opinion.. opinion I do not trust the 2.4 kernel yet. If there was something in it that I absolutely had to have then i would use it. But only if I could not work around the problem by getting different hardware or trying to do the task in a different way first. 2.4.18 has been said by many to be a good starting point(sorry i can't provide references, ive just seen it mentioned a few times in various places). sort of the real 2.4.0. I tend to agree, I have used 2.4.18 on SusE 8(i think it uses 2.4.18) and it seems halfway decent. but it won't make it onto any of my serious servers or workstations. Many people(seems many on this list, or at least many of the active posters) like to live on the edge with the 2.4 kernel, or even 2.5 kernel, running debian unstable ..etc. I used to like to live on the edge too, back in the 2.1.x days ..i ran slackware i think at the time and upgraded libc manually. but now i have gotten to the point where i just want my system to work well. I don't want to have to debug a bad package or a kernel bug. i want to set it and forget it(more or less). i like to spend my time on learning new things rather then fixing old problems. that said, I have no problem what kernel debian ships with, the first thing i do on my systems is put in a custom kernel anyways, so provided the kernel works long enough to boot the system and install thats fine by me. 2.2.19 is the most solid linux kernel I have used to date. My workstation at work which I hammer on 5 days a week was up for more then 380 days before a 2 hour power outage killed it(UPS only lasted for 30minutes). I have dozens of other servers with 6-10 months of uptime. I'm sure some 2.4.x kernels do the same, but it seemed at least until 2.4.18 that every release 2.4.x that came out seemed to have some serious fix(I read kernel traffic every week). 2.2 had this problem for a while too. 2.2.11 was a nightmare, the memory management went to hell and didn't recover for another 6 months at 2.2.15, then there were some security problems in 2.2.15 and i think 2.2.17, there is even a minor security problem with the NAT code in 2.2.19 i beleive. nothing like the 2.2.15 rootable problem though. I think there is a significant amount of people out there like me who like debian specifically because it is stable. The 2.4 kernel does not offer many compelling reasons to upgrade for most systems, which is good, that tells me linux is mature when the latest and greatest is not required. as for if most of the bugs are worked out.. since some people(myself included) think 2.4.18 is a starting point for 2.4, I will give 2.4.x another 6-8 months at least before i think about deploying it on my servers(even my personal ones). i've told people before...I have personally used about a dozen different linux and unix systems(more or less), on half a dozen different hardware platforms. and for low end systems(1/2 CPU with less then 2GB ram) debian has been the most solid and easily maintained of all of them for me. /opinion nate debian user since 2.0(hamm ?) was released slackware user before that -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] I take it you don't have USB then. That is one of the most useful things that the 2.4.x kernels gave us, USB. I have actually got a USB Handspring Visor syncing with my Debian (Woody) 2.4.18 system. I'm working on my mp3 player. I remember being forced to dual boot just so I could sync a PDA, but now I've been Windows free for about 6 months becuase the 2.4.18 kernel has USB pretty much straightened out. signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: 2.2 vs 2.4 kernels
quote who=Reid Gilman I take it you don't have USB then. That is one of the most useful things that the 2.4.x kernels gave us, USB. I have actually got a USB Handspring Visor syncing with my Debian (Woody) 2.4.18 system. I'm working on my mp3 player. I remember being forced to dual boot just so I could sync a PDA, but now I've been Windows free for about 6 months becuase the 2.4.18 kernel has USB pretty much straightened out. many basic USB devices work under 2.2 I have my kodak digital camera working, I have my logitech Trackman marble wheel(in USB mode on my laptops), and i have my handspring visor deluxe as well as my handspring visor prism both in USB mode working fine on 2.2.x i think 2.2.19 or was it 2.2.18 included the usb patches, before that i grabbed the 3rd party usb patch..also a 4-port USB hub which i use to simultaneously connect(well more so to have available i don't use all 4 devices at the same time) my camera/trackball/visor1/visor2 to my laptops which only have 1 USB port. I put off getting a camera for a long time becuase i thought the 2.2.x camera support would be bad(didn't find much info on it other then using really old cameras). so I purchased a refurb kodak because it was one of the few models that had a driver. little did i know that gphoto2 uses usb in a different way and I don't even need a driver, using the driver actually breaks gphoto2 :) took me about an hour to figure that one out!! some things don't work, i think USB generic storage devices don't work as well as some of the more advanced stuff ..but what i have..works i would like to use a USB-based compact flash adapter, but those don't work under 2.2.x as far as i've seen so i just have to live without it for now(or load up a 2.4.x based distribution in VMware, and enable USB in vmware and export the filesystem from the Compact flash to NFS and mount it in my 2.2.x based system ..!) 2.4.x may have better/cleaner usb support, but as long as it works in 2.2.x i am satisfied .. nate -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.2 vs 2.4 kernels
On Tue, 2002-06-25 at 13:19, nate wrote: quote who=Reid Gilman I take it you don't have USB then. That is one of the most useful things that the 2.4.x kernels gave us, USB. I have actually got a USB Handspring Visor syncing with my Debian (Woody) 2.4.18 system. I'm working on my mp3 player. I remember being forced to dual boot just so I could sync a PDA, but now I've been Windows free for about 6 months becuase the 2.4.18 kernel has USB pretty much straightened out. many basic USB devices work under 2.2 I have my kodak digital camera working, I have my logitech Trackman marble wheel(in USB mode on my laptops), and i have my handspring visor deluxe as well as my handspring visor prism both in USB mode working fine on 2.2.x i think 2.2.19 or was it 2.2.18 included the usb patches, before that i grabbed the 3rd party usb patch..also a 4-port USB hub which i use to simultaneously connect(well more so to have available i don't use all 4 devices at the same time) my camera/trackball/visor1/visor2 to my laptops which only have 1 USB port. I put off getting a camera for a long time becuase i thought the 2.2.x camera support would be bad(didn't find much info on it other then using really old cameras). so I purchased a refurb kodak because it was one of the few models that had a driver. little did i know that gphoto2 uses usb in a different way and I don't even need a driver, using the driver actually breaks gphoto2 :) took me about an hour to figure that one out!! some things don't work, i think USB generic storage devices don't work as well as some of the more advanced stuff ..but what i have..works i would like to use a USB-based compact flash adapter, but those don't work under 2.2.x as far as i've seen so i just have to live without it for now(or load up a 2.4.x based distribution in VMware, and enable USB in vmware and export the filesystem from the Compact flash to NFS and mount it in my 2.2.x based system ..!) 2.4.x may have better/cleaner usb support, but as long as it works in 2.2.x i am satisfied .. nate I guess if you have USB working fine under 2.2.18 then there isn't a big problem. I haven't had much luck making USB work in anything but 2.4.x. That's just me though. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
2.2 vs 2.4 kernels
Can someone explain (or supply a pointer to an explanation of) what is wrong with the 2.4 kernel, that debian plans to continue offering the 2.2 kernel with woody? Several other distros have been shipping with 2.4 exclusively for over a year, surely most of the bugs have been shaken out? __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.2 vs 2.4 kernels
On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 23:03, Nick Jacobs wrote: Can someone explain (or supply a pointer to an explanation of) what is wrong with the 2.4 kernel, that debian plans to continue offering the 2.2 kernel with woody? Several other distros have been shipping with 2.4 exclusively for over a year, surely most of the bugs have been shaken out? No they haven't... and what's wrong with choice ;) You can always select the 2.4 kernel from the boot/install-cd so what is the problem. -- Mark Janssen -- maniac(at)maniac.nl -- GnuPG Key Id: 357D2178 Unix / Linux, Open-Source and Internet Consultant @ SyConOS IT Maniac.nl Unix-God.Net|Org MarkJanssen.org|nl SyConOS.com|nl signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: 2.2 vs 2.4 kernels
The Debian stable release is that, stable. It is not supposed to have the latest and greatest features, if you want to get the 2.4.x kernels (which in my experience are perfectly stable) you can, or you can get the testing or unstable distro. But that's why Debian has three distros. On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 17:03, Nick Jacobs wrote: Can someone explain (or supply a pointer to an explanation of) what is wrong with the 2.4 kernel, that debian plans to continue offering the 2.2 kernel with woody? Several other distros have been shipping with 2.4 exclusively for over a year, surely most of the bugs have been shaken out? __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! - Official partner of 2002 FIFA World Cup http://fifaworldcup.yahoo.com -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: 2.2 vs 2.4 kernels (OT)
On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 17:20, Reid Gilman wrote: The Debian stable release is that, stable. It is not supposed to have the latest and greatest features, if you want to get the 2.4.x kernels (which in my experience are perfectly stable) you can, or you can get the testing or unstable distro. But that's why Debian has three distros. I am curious, I have heard both explanations at different times regarding the meaning of stable... some people have said that only stable versions of software are (or should be) included while others have suggested that the term 'stable' applies to the packaging/dependencies Does debian policy indicate the 'One True Definition' of 'stable'? Not trying to start flames (I swear!), just curious -Mark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.2 vs 2.4 kernels (OT)
Thus spake Mark Roach last Mon, Jun 24, 2002 at 07:52:15PM -0400: On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 17:20, Reid Gilman wrote: The Debian stable release is that, stable. It is not supposed to have the latest and greatest features, if you want to get the 2.4.x kernels (which in my experience are perfectly stable) you can, or you can get the testing or unstable distro. But that's why Debian has three distros. I am curious, I have heard both explanations at different times regarding the meaning of stable... some people have said that only stable versions of software are (or should be) included while others have suggested that the term 'stable' applies to the packaging/dependencies To add another pickle in your salad of definitions to what is called the stable distribution - let's just say that here stable is close to static - no major upgrades are committed to the stable tree save for security updates (which are mostly bug-fixes and not upgrades in a sense). It has been done like this to prevent breaking of dependencies, as well as to ensure that each piece of software would work as fine as possible, and would be tolerable enough for usage in production environments. So in a sense, it's actually all of what you've heard;) -- --paolo Paolo Alexis Falcone [EMAIL PROTECTED]GnuPG KeyID: 0xEADFF6F4 University of the Philippines Manila ___ I think ideology sucks. This world would be a better place if people have less ideology, and a whole lot more I do this because it's FUN and because others might find it useful, not because I have religion. --Linus Torvalds ___ Philippine Free Network Group free.net.ph -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: 2.2 vs 2.4 kernels (OT)
I think Debian calls one release stable because although the newer kernels and packages may be fairly stable, anything in a stable release should be crash-proof. No security holes should be present and it should be usable on mission critical systems. I wouldn't want my system running on a Fortune 500 company's server because its always a work in progress. The stable distro is pretty much finished and it works. On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 19:52, Mark Roach wrote: On Mon, 2002-06-24 at 17:20, Reid Gilman wrote: The Debian stable release is that, stable. It is not supposed to have the latest and greatest features, if you want to get the 2.4.x kernels (which in my experience are perfectly stable) you can, or you can get the testing or unstable distro. But that's why Debian has three distros. I am curious, I have heard both explanations at different times regarding the meaning of stable... some people have said that only stable versions of software are (or should be) included while others have suggested that the term 'stable' applies to the packaging/dependencies Does debian policy indicate the 'One True Definition' of 'stable'? Not trying to start flames (I swear!), just curious -Mark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Kernel 2.2 para 2.4
On Wed, 13 Feb 2002 15:33:35 -0200 QRS Informatica [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Olá Lista... Gostaria de saber se alguém sabe onde encontro um Howtoo para passar do kernel 2.2 para 2.4 em meu debian potato 2.2 r3. no Guia Pratico[1] tem uma seção bem prática sobre isso, se você tiver dificuldades com ela escreva para a lista ou diretamente para mim para que eu possa melhorar o bicho [1]: http://debian-br.cipsga.org.br/view.php?doc=pratico Obs.: Motivos porque quero fazer isso: três coisas: 1º - Não tenho nada pra fazer... :-) 1. é seu direito não falar o motivo que o leva a fazer algo, mesmo se alguém cobrar na lista ;) 2º - Tenho Alguns Hardware's que não funcionam no 2.2... :-(( 2. entãoo você tem algo pra fazer... hehehe []s! -- Gustavo Noronha Silva - kov http://www.metainfo.org/kov *-* -+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+-+ | .''`. | Debian GNU/Linux: http://www.debian.org | | : :' : + Debian BR...: http://debian-br.cipsga.org.br+ | `. `'` + Q: Why did the chicken cross the road? + | `-| A: Upstream's decision. -- hmh | *-* -+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+--+-+-+
dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
Folks - I've been having a terrible time attempting to upgrade my perfectly good potato installation to the new woody distribution including the 2.4 kernel. Each time I attempt to install the kernel, I get a statement regarding initrd, and the upgrade fails. I've looked high and low for documentation on this upgrade, but have failed miserably in finding any. Can someone please point me to documentation to get me over this hurdle. (yes, I've seen the potato docs to upgrade potato to the 2.4 kernel but I'm looking to get to a full-blown woody installation.) All help appreciated. Thanks. Stephen L. Nosal New York, NY
Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
What does the error say? Has the new 2.4 kernel been installed and booted? If so, is raid compiled in or made available as modules? --mike On 06 Aug 2001 10:18:49 -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Folks - I've been having a terrible time attempting to upgrade my perfectly good potato installation to the new woody distribution including the 2.4 kernel. Each time I attempt to install the kernel, I get a statement regarding initrd, and the upgrade fails. I've looked high and low for documentation on this upgrade, but have failed miserably in finding any. Can someone please point me to documentation to get me over this hurdle. (yes, I've seen the potato docs to upgrade potato to the 2.4 kernel but I'm looking to get to a full-blown woody installation.) All help appreciated. Thanks. Stephen L. Nosal New York, NY -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
Ooops. Disregard all that stuff on raid. I haven't had enough coffee yet this morning. --mike On 06 Aug 2001 10:18:49 -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Folks - I've been having a terrible time attempting to upgrade my perfectly good potato installation to the new woody distribution including the 2.4 kernel. Each time I attempt to install the kernel, I get a statement regarding initrd, and the upgrade fails. I've looked high and low for documentation on this upgrade, but have failed miserably in finding any. Can someone please point me to documentation to get me over this hurdle. (yes, I've seen the potato docs to upgrade potato to the 2.4 kernel but I'm looking to get to a full-blown woody installation.) All help appreciated. Thanks. Stephen L. Nosal New York, NY -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
Mike - The 2.4 kernel has been installed, boot floppy created, and the reboot fails with a kernel panic that it can't find root at hda2. Root is located at /dev/hda2. There is no boot prompt to pass the process additional parameters. - Steve -Original Message- From: Michael Heldebrant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 10:34 AM To: Debian User List (E-mail) Subject: Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel What does the error say? Has the new 2.4 kernel been installed and booted? raid comments removed as requested --mike On 06 Aug 2001 10:18:49 -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Folks - I've been having a terrible time attempting to upgrade my perfectly good potato installation to the new woody distribution including the 2.4 kernel. Each time I attempt to install the kernel, I get a statement regarding initrd, and the upgrade fails. I've looked high and low for documentation on this upgrade, but have failed miserably in finding any. Can someone please point me to documentation to get me over this hurdle. (yes, I've seen the potato docs to upgrade potato to the 2.4 kernel but I'm looking to get to a full-blown woody installation.) All help appreciated. Thanks. Stephen L. Nosal New York, NY -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 10:18:49AM -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Folks - I've been having a terrible time attempting to upgrade my perfectly good potato installation to the new woody distribution including the 2.4 kernel. Each time I attempt to install the kernel, I get a statement regarding initrd, and the upgrade fails. I just did this last weekend and had no trouble. However, I did it in several steps: 1. Performed an apt-get dist-upgrade without changing kernels. 2. Compiled my own 2.2.6 kernel 3. Installed the new kernel and rebooted. Is this what you are doing? -- Mark
RE: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
What type of controller is the hard drive on at the moment? It would appear that nothing is available to read your root partition. I get this everytime I forget to compile in my scsi drivers instead of making modules, perhaps ide disk support is slightly lacking in your kernel. What are you booting from partition wise? Does your old kernel work? --mike On 06 Aug 2001 10:45:18 -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Mike - The 2.4 kernel has been installed, boot floppy created, and the reboot fails with a kernel panic that it can't find root at hda2. Root is located at /dev/hda2. There is no boot prompt to pass the process additional parameters. - Steve -Original Message- From: Michael Heldebrant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 10:34 AM To: Debian User List (E-mail) Subject: Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel What does the error say? Has the new 2.4 kernel been installed and booted? raid comments removed as requested --mike On 06 Aug 2001 10:18:49 -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Folks - I've been having a terrible time attempting to upgrade my perfectly good potato installation to the new woody distribution including the 2.4 kernel. Each time I attempt to install the kernel, I get a statement regarding initrd, and the upgrade fails. I've looked high and low for documentation on this upgrade, but have failed miserably in finding any. Can someone please point me to documentation to get me over this hurdle. (yes, I've seen the potato docs to upgrade potato to the 2.4 kernel but I'm looking to get to a full-blown woody installation.) All help appreciated. Thanks. Stephen L. Nosal New York, NY -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
Mark - I've performed the apt-get dist-upgrade without the kernel change. Then, rather than compiling the kernel, I'm apt-get install ing the new kernel-image. The configuration has been my down fall. It proceeds normally, but then the reboot fails with a kernel panic that it can't find root at hda2. Root is located at /dev/hda2. There is no boot prompt to pass the process additional parameters. - Steve -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 10:48 AM To: Stephen Nosal; debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 10:18:49AM -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Folks - I've been having a terrible time attempting to upgrade my perfectly good potato installation to the new woody distribution including the 2.4 kernel. Each time I attempt to install the kernel, I get a statement regarding initrd, and the upgrade fails. I just did this last weekend and had no trouble. However, I did it in several steps: 1. Performed an apt-get dist-upgrade without changing kernels. 2. Compiled my own 2.2.6 kernel 3. Installed the new kernel and rebooted. Is this what you are doing? -- Mark
RE: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
It's a 1999 Dell box with a stock ide controller. I've never had a problem with linux recognizing it before and it shows up in the boot messages before the kernel panic, so I'm assuming that I'm okay here. My old kernel (potato vanilla install v2.2.19) works just fine. -Original Message- From: Michael Heldebrant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 10:52 AM To: Stephen Nosal Cc: 'Debian User List (E-mail)' Subject: RE: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel What type of controller is the hard drive on at the moment? It would appear that nothing is available to read your root partition. I get this everytime I forget to compile in my scsi drivers instead of making modules, perhaps ide disk support is slightly lacking in your kernel. What are you booting from partition wise? Does your old kernel work? --mike On 06 Aug 2001 10:45:18 -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Mike - The 2.4 kernel has been installed, boot floppy created, and the reboot fails with a kernel panic that it can't find root at hda2. Root is located at /dev/hda2. There is no boot prompt to pass the process additional parameters. - Steve -Original Message- From: Michael Heldebrant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 10:34 AM To: Debian User List (E-mail) Subject: Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel What does the error say? Has the new 2.4 kernel been installed and booted? raid comments removed as requested --mike On 06 Aug 2001 10:18:49 -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Folks - I've been having a terrible time attempting to upgrade my perfectly good potato installation to the new woody distribution including the 2.4 kernel. Each time I attempt to install the kernel, I get a statement regarding initrd, and the upgrade fails. I've looked high and low for documentation on this upgrade, but have failed miserably in finding any. Can someone please point me to documentation to get me over this hurdle. (yes, I've seen the potato docs to upgrade potato to the 2.4 kernel but I'm looking to get to a full-blown woody installation.) All help appreciated. Thanks. Stephen L. Nosal New York, NY -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 10:54:18AM -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Mark - I've performed the apt-get dist-upgrade without the kernel change. Then, rather than compiling the kernel, I'm apt-get install ing the new kernel-image. The configuration has been my down fall. It proceeds normally, but then the reboot fails with a kernel panic that it can't find root at hda2. Root is located at /dev/hda2. There is no boot prompt to pass the process additional parameters. I'm not sure what is in the prebuilt kernel images but I've been told that with the 2.4 kernels it is possible to compile device support for your root device as a module. This is too weird for me so I haven't attempted it. Perhaps that is what they are doing and it's not working. In any event, it may be faster for you to build your own kernel rather than wonder what is wrong with theirs. -- Mark
Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
Mark - I've performed the apt-get dist-upgrade without the kernel change. Then, rather than compiling the kernel, I'm apt-get install ing the new kernel-image. The configuration has been my down fall. It proceeds normally, but then the reboot fails with a kernel panic that it can't find root at hda2. Root is located at /dev/hda2. There is no boot prompt to pass the process additional parameters. - Steve I proceeded the same way, and had the same error, kernel panic, for the same reason. (In my case, it tried to locate root on another partition, of course ...) Hopefully I had lilo configured with both the old and the new kernel, and it did restart _without_ any problem with my old 2.2.17 Kernel ?? Laurent.
Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
What does the boot init (read quickly ;) say when it gets to ide devices? Perhaps your root disk is now on something else. Especially if you are using devfs (not sure if it's in the prebuilt 2.4 kernel) it may have moved to /dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part2. Try that as a root parameter when lilo comes up with 2.4 with the left shift key. I.e. Lilo prompt (you type) linux root=/dev/ide/host0/bus0/target0/lun0/part2 Just a shot in the dark. I also recommend compiling your own kernel as well like Mark suggests. --mike On 06 Aug 2001 09:04:43 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 10:54:18AM -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Mark - I've performed the apt-get dist-upgrade without the kernel change. Then, rather than compiling the kernel, I'm apt-get install ing the new kernel-image. The configuration has been my down fall. It proceeds normally, but then the reboot fails with a kernel panic that it can't find root at hda2. Root is located at /dev/hda2. There is no boot prompt to pass the process additional parameters. I'm not sure what is in the prebuilt kernel images but I've been told that with the 2.4 kernels it is possible to compile device support for your root device as a module. This is too weird for me so I haven't attempted it. Perhaps that is what they are doing and it's not working. In any event, it may be faster for you to build your own kernel rather than wonder what is wrong with theirs. -- Mark -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 08:47:59AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 10:18:49AM -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Folks - I've been having a terrible time attempting to upgrade my perfectly good potato installation to the new woody distribution including the 2.4 kernel. Each time I attempt to install the kernel, I get a statement regarding initrd, and the upgrade fails. Add this to your lilo.conf under the new kernel. initrd=/boot/initrd-2.4.4-686 Change the initrd to point to the appropriate file on your system. Rerun lilo, and reboot. 2.4 uses a ramdisk to boot. This hit me too. Mike -- Michael P. Soulier [EMAIL PROTECTED] With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead. -- RFC 1925 pgpy8M3bsK4R1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
Interesting. My lilo.conf has no line about initrd and dmesg reports nothing on ramdisks for my 2.4.7 system. What type of systems need a ramdisk to boot initially? --mike On 06 Aug 2001 11:51:33 -0400, Michael P. Soulier wrote: On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 08:47:59AM -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 10:18:49AM -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Folks - I've been having a terrible time attempting to upgrade my perfectly good potato installation to the new woody distribution including the 2.4 kernel. Each time I attempt to install the kernel, I get a statement regarding initrd, and the upgrade fails. Add this to your lilo.conf under the new kernel. initrd=/boot/initrd-2.4.4-686 Change the initrd to point to the appropriate file on your system. Rerun lilo, and reboot. 2.4 uses a ramdisk to boot. This hit me too. Mike -- Michael P. Soulier [EMAIL PROTECTED] With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead. -- RFC 1925
Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 11:04:51AM -0500, Michael Heldebrant wrote: Interesting. My lilo.conf has no line about initrd and dmesg reports nothing on ramdisks for my 2.4.7 system. What type of systems need a ramdisk to boot initially? I understood that all 2.4 kernels do, but I suppose it depends on whether or not the builder of the kernel used one? Mike -- Michael P. Soulier [EMAIL PROTECTED] With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead. -- RFC 1925 pgpyoLt3eYJLx.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 12:19:05PM -0400, Michael P. Soulier wrote: On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 11:04:51AM -0500, Michael Heldebrant wrote: Interesting. My lilo.conf has no line about initrd and dmesg reports nothing on ramdisks for my 2.4.7 system. What type of systems need a ramdisk to boot initially? I understood that all 2.4 kernels do, but I suppose it depends on whether or not the builder of the kernel used one? In this case, the difference is whether you're installing a debian kernel-image or compiling your own. The kernel images require an initrd. When you compile your own, it is of course up to you whether you use an initrd or not. I run 2.4.7 ... just for the fun of it I tried an initrd with drivers for my SCSI HBA. I couldn't get it to work ;-) Since I'm busy with real world stuff I said to hell with it and compiled the SCSI driver into the kernel proper ... initrd will have to wait. -- Nathan Norman - Staff Engineer | A good plan today is better Micromuse Ltd. | than a perfect plan tomorrow. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Patton pgpzmIOk7RKwE.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
so, is it possible that the standard build requires a ramdisk, but if you 'roll your own' it is not necessary? If the above is true, and I wish to install the standard build kernel, how do I go about putting together this ramdisk and configuring it correctly? is it as simple as an additional line in lilo? What creates the 'initrd-2.4.4-686' file? - Steve -Original Message- From: Michael P. Soulier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 12:19 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 11:04:51AM -0500, Michael Heldebrant wrote: Interesting. My lilo.conf has no line about initrd and dmesg reports nothing on ramdisks for my 2.4.7 system. What type of systems need a ramdisk to boot initially? I understood that all 2.4 kernels do, but I suppose it depends on whether or not the builder of the kernel used one? Mike -- Michael P. Soulier [EMAIL PROTECTED] With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead. -- RFC 1925
RE: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
Not sure how to make one. There should be a faq somewhere. What do you need in it is the real question. Maybe you can steal it from the root disk from the installation set. I checked the initrd man page and I'm still wondering how to use it. I'm also still confused why you don't want to compile your own kernel. --mike On 06 Aug 2001 12:49:09 -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: so, is it possible that the standard build requires a ramdisk, but if you 'roll your own' it is not necessary? If the above is true, and I wish to install the standard build kernel, how do I go about putting together this ramdisk and configuring it correctly? is it as simple as an additional line in lilo? What creates the 'initrd-2.4.4-686' file? - Steve -Original Message- From: Michael P. Soulier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 12:19 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 11:04:51AM -0500, Michael Heldebrant wrote: Interesting. My lilo.conf has no line about initrd and dmesg reports nothing on ramdisks for my 2.4.7 system. What type of systems need a ramdisk to boot initially? I understood that all 2.4 kernels do, but I suppose it depends on whether or not the builder of the kernel used one? Mike -- Michael P. Soulier [EMAIL PROTECTED] With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead. -- RFC 1925 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 11:50:39AM -0500, Nathan E Norman wrote: In this case, the difference is whether you're installing a debian kernel-image or compiling your own. The kernel images require an initrd. When you compile your own, it is of course up to you whether you use an initrd or not. I run 2.4.7 ... just for the fun of it I tried an initrd with drivers for my SCSI HBA. I couldn't get it to work ;-) Since I'm busy with real world stuff I said to hell with it and compiled the SCSI driver into the kernel proper ... initrd will have to wait. Is there something that one loses when not using a ramdisk? Mike -- Michael P. Soulier [EMAIL PROTECTED] With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead. -- RFC 1925 pgpAsSMnf7gBL.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 12:49:09PM -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: so, is it possible that the standard build requires a ramdisk, but if you 'roll your own' it is not necessary? If the above is true, and I wish to install the standard build kernel, how do I go about putting together this ramdisk and configuring it correctly? is it as simple as an additional line in lilo? What creates the 'initrd-2.4.4-686' file? The file came with the kernel. In fact, the lilo line was made known to me during the install by a debconf message. Mike -- Michael P. Soulier [EMAIL PROTECTED] With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead. -- RFC 1925 pgpX17Gc4XCzE.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
Mike - I'd love to find the faq out there on this. I have no objection to compiling my own kernel except that I'm relatively new to Debian and I'm trying to find the simplest way to maintain an up to date system. I have no problem running either testing or unstable for that matter, but I'm learning all the ins and outs of apt, dselect, and dpkg and would love to figure this kernel upgrade matter out. - Steve -Original Message- From: Michael Heldebrant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 1:04 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: RE: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel Not sure how to make one. There should be a faq somewhere. What do you need in it is the real question. Maybe you can steal it from the root disk from the installation set. I checked the initrd man page and I'm still wondering how to use it. I'm also still confused why you don't want to compile your own kernel. --mike On 06 Aug 2001 12:49:09 -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: so, is it possible that the standard build requires a ramdisk, but if you 'roll your own' it is not necessary? If the above is true, and I wish to install the standard build kernel, how do I go about putting together this ramdisk and configuring it correctly? is it as simple as an additional line in lilo? What creates the 'initrd-2.4.4-686' file? - Steve -Original Message- From: Michael P. Soulier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 12:19 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 11:04:51AM -0500, Michael Heldebrant wrote: Interesting. My lilo.conf has no line about initrd and dmesg reports nothing on ramdisks for my 2.4.7 system. What type of systems need a ramdisk to boot initially? I understood that all 2.4 kernels do, but I suppose it depends on whether or not the builder of the kernel used one? Mike -- Michael P. Soulier [EMAIL PROTECTED] With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead. -- RFC 1925 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
RE: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
Mike - so the initrd showed up in the kernel-image package along with instructions. Perhaps I should try this again and see if I'm missing something. Otherwise, I guess I'll just have to compile my own... - Steve -Original Message- From: Michael P. Soulier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 2:11 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 12:49:09PM -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: so, is it possible that the standard build requires a ramdisk, but if you 'roll your own' it is not necessary? If the above is true, and I wish to install the standard build kernel, how do I go about putting together this ramdisk and configuring it correctly? is it as simple as an additional line in lilo? What creates the 'initrd-2.4.4-686' file? The file came with the kernel. In fact, the lilo line was made known to me during the install by a debconf message. Mike -- Michael P. Soulier [EMAIL PROTECTED] With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead. -- RFC 1925
Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 02:09:51PM -0400, Michael P. Soulier wrote: On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 11:50:39AM -0500, Nathan E Norman wrote: In this case, the difference is whether you're installing a debian kernel-image or compiling your own. The kernel images require an initrd. When you compile your own, it is of course up to you whether you use an initrd or not. I run 2.4.7 ... just for the fun of it I tried an initrd with drivers for my SCSI HBA. I couldn't get it to work ;-) Since I'm busy with real world stuff I said to hell with it and compiled the SCSI driver into the kernel proper ... initrd will have to wait. Is there something that one loses when not using a ramdisk? You lose the ability to remove something that's a module using the ramdisk method. Usually that's no big deal since said module is critical anyway (SCSI HBA for the root fs, etc.) initrd is a great thing for RAID, multiple systems (you only need one kernel for myriad systems) ... -- Nathan Norman - Staff Engineer | A good plan today is better Micromuse Ltd. | than a perfect plan tomorrow. mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] | -- Patton pgpLA0grKhXBm.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
I'm interested to see if that fixes it. I'm not sure why you would need the ramdisk but I'm sure it's there for a reason. Making kernels the debian way is actually really easy. Then you can install the new kernel as a package and remove etc like a package. Get fakeroot and kernel-package. Making kernels is as easy as one command (after config of course). You can even try and get the .config from the precompiled kernel so you only have to edit a few things. --mike On 06 Aug 2001 15:10:28 -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Mike - so the initrd showed up in the kernel-image package along with instructions. Perhaps I should try this again and see if I'm missing something. Otherwise, I guess I'll just have to compile my own... - Steve -Original Message- From: Michael P. Soulier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 2:11 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 12:49:09PM -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: so, is it possible that the standard build requires a ramdisk, but if you 'roll your own' it is not necessary? If the above is true, and I wish to install the standard build kernel, how do I go about putting together this ramdisk and configuring it correctly? is it as simple as an additional line in lilo? What creates the 'initrd-2.4.4-686' file? The file came with the kernel. In fact, the lilo line was made known to me during the install by a debconf message. Mike -- Michael P. Soulier [EMAIL PROTECTED] With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead. -- RFC 1925 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 03:10:28PM -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Mike - so the initrd showed up in the kernel-image package along with instructions. Perhaps I should try this again and see if I'm missing something. Otherwise, I guess I'll just have to compile my own... Hmm. Looking now I'm not sure. I think I might have made it with mkinitrd. You need the initrd-tools package. Mike pgpHFP70Zpi3h.pgp Description: PGP signature
RE: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel
okay. So now it looks as though I actually lose functionality by using a ramdisk to gain multi-system flexibility. Perhaps I need to go back and look at compiling my own kernel now as opposed to learning mkinitrd... But why is a ram disk now a standard part of the kernel-image? There must be a reason somewhere... now my curiosity is peaked. - Steve -Original Message- From: Michael Heldebrant [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 4:08 PM To: Stephen Nosal Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: RE: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel I'm interested to see if that fixes it. I'm not sure why you would need the ramdisk but I'm sure it's there for a reason. Making kernels the debian way is actually really easy. Then you can install the new kernel as a package and remove etc like a package. Get fakeroot and kernel-package. Making kernels is as easy as one command (after config of course). You can even try and get the .config from the precompiled kernel so you only have to edit a few things. --mike On 06 Aug 2001 15:10:28 -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: Mike - so the initrd showed up in the kernel-image package along with instructions. Perhaps I should try this again and see if I'm missing something. Otherwise, I guess I'll just have to compile my own... - Steve -Original Message- From: Michael P. Soulier [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, August 06, 2001 2:11 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: dist upgrade potato to woody 2.2 to 2.4 kernel On Mon, Aug 06, 2001 at 12:49:09PM -0400, Stephen Nosal wrote: so, is it possible that the standard build requires a ramdisk, but if you 'roll your own' it is not necessary? If the above is true, and I wish to install the standard build kernel, how do I go about putting together this ramdisk and configuring it correctly? is it as simple as an additional line in lilo? What creates the 'initrd-2.4.4-686' file? The file came with the kernel. In fact, the lilo line was made known to me during the install by a debconf message. Mike -- Michael P. Soulier [EMAIL PROTECTED] With sufficient thrust, pigs fly just fine. However, this is not necessarily a good idea. It is hard to be sure where they are going to land, and it could be dangerous sitting under them as they fly overhead. -- RFC 1925 -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: New device names after kernel update from 2.2 to 2.4
Herbert == Herbert Pirke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Herbert As far as I know, some block device names changed with the Herbert 2.4 kernel, so I wonder if that changes a lot. Maybe some Herbert changed/added simlinks fix the problem. Normally, you shouldn't need to change anything. The kernel doesn't care about device names, it only looks at the major/minor device numbers in the inode. I don't know exactly which device names have changed, but it should only affect you if you have some special hardware. (Devfs is a different issue, but you don't have to use that if you don't want to.) I expect a thorough reorganization of /dev during the 2.5 series, but the kernel gurus haven't yet decided on how to do this. Herbert Also, is it possible to have a 2.2 and a 2.4 kernel on one Herbert machine and let lilo either boot one or the other? Yes, all the software that can handle 2.4 can also work with a 2.2 kernel. Woody is fully 2.4-ready (off course it also works for a 2.2 kernel). For potato, look for the packages Adrian Bunk has made. (I don't have the URL here, but they're mentioned on the list from time to time.) -- G. ``Iggy'' Geens - ICQ: #64109250 Home: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] WWW: http://users.pandora.be/guy.geens/ `I want quality, not quantity. But I want lots of it!'
New device names after kernel update from 2.2 to 2.4
Hi, I have a general question about the possibility of updating from 2.2.18 to a 2.4.x kernel without reinstalling everything. A lot of things changed in the new release and I just wanted to know if updating in this case means a complete new installation or if it is just another make, dep, clean, bzImage... etc. as it used to be for 2.2.x updates. As far as I know, some block device names changed with the 2.4 kernel, so I wonder if that changes a lot. Maybe some changed/added simlinks fix the problem. Also, is it possible to have a 2.2 and a 2.4 kernel on one machine and let lilo either boot one or the other? Herbert __ Do You Yahoo!? Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
Re: 2.2 to 2.4
On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 07:23:48PM -0400, Paul Wright wrote: Yeah, the kernel keeps on growing, it's almost like another OS I'd heard of once... Just like pretty much any other software. I challenge you to find 3 programms under active development for over a year that didn't grow. With the exeption of software that has being small as the primary development target (eg busybox). -- Casper Gielen [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- People just generally like to disagree. Bill Joy
Re: 2.2 to 2.4
After compiling the new kernel, I get the 'uncompresing kernel...OK' text and then nothing happens, the system just hangs and i have to reboot it. any ideas!? My system is a P200 MMX with 128MB RAM. Debian 2.2 fully upgraded with a Do you still have the config file that you used for your 2.2 kernel? If so put it in the 2.4 source tree named .config and run make oldconfig. That will make sure that you have all of the same config settings that you had before and either confirm that is is a configuration problem or prove that it is not. Is this recommended between *major* kernel revisions, i.e. the change from 2.2.x to 2.4.x ?? I personally had problems when doing this. It would compile okay, but on reboot, it would hang around the point that it tried to mount the filesystem. Starting with a clean .config file and then modifying it with my settings (basically the same changes I had with my 2.2.x kernel) seemed to fix this problem. Hall
2.2 to 2.4
After compiling the new kernel, I get the 'uncompresing kernel...OK' text and then nothing happens, the system just hangs and i have to reboot it. any ideas!? My system is a P200 MMX with 128MB RAM. Debian 2.2 fully upgraded with a sources.list as follows: deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib non-free deb http://security.debian.org stable/updates main contrib non-free deb http://people.debian.org/~bunk/debian potato main I am trying to upgrade from the 2.2 kernel in order to have my ADSL connection with Alcatel modem working on Linux. When I do my make bzlilo, I reboot and it ahngs at the forst stage: I get the 'uncompresing kernel...OK' text and then nothing happens, the system just hangs and i have to reboot it. Actually I have to pull the power cable out as even the keyboard disappears at this point. All help appreciated...
Re: 2.2 to 2.4
After compiling the new kernel, I get the 'uncompresing kernel... OK' text and then nothing happens, the system just hangs and i have to reboot it. any ideas!? My system is a P200 MMX with 128MB RAM. Debian 2.2 fully upgraded with a... Did you change the kernel's processor (CPU) selection to i386, 486, Pentium (I), etc ?? The default is for a Pentium 4, I think. Hall
Re: 2.2 to 2.4
Good question but I did that change. I wonder would woody solve this problem or is that taking a leap too far? Bunk seems to have done a great job for those of us who need stable Debian servers with USB support but what's the point if I can't boot it. - Original Message - From: Hall Stevenson [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Patrick Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED]; debian-user@lists.debian.org Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 5:36 PM Subject: Re: 2.2 to 2.4 | After compiling the new kernel, I get the 'uncompresing kernel... | OK' text and then nothing happens, the system just hangs and | i have to reboot it. any ideas!? | | My system is a P200 MMX with 128MB RAM. Debian 2.2 fully | upgraded with a... | | Did you change the kernel's processor (CPU) selection to i386, 486, | Pentium (I), etc ?? The default is for a Pentium 4, I think. | | Hall | |
Re: 2.2 to 2.4
Do you still have the config file that you used for your 2.2 kernel? If so put it in the 2.4 source tree named .config and run make oldconfig. That will make sure that you have all of the same config settings that you had before and either confirm that is is a configuration problem or prove that it is not. On Thu, May 24, 2001 at 05:18:30PM +0100, Patrick Kirk wrote: After compiling the new kernel, I get the 'uncompresing kernel...OK' text and then nothing happens, the system just hangs and i have to reboot it. any ideas!? My system is a P200 MMX with 128MB RAM. Debian 2.2 fully upgraded with a sources.list as follows: deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib non-free deb http://security.debian.org stable/updates main contrib non-free deb http://people.debian.org/~bunk/debian potato main I am trying to upgrade from the 2.2 kernel in order to have my ADSL connection with Alcatel modem working on Linux. When I do my make bzlilo, I reboot and it ahngs at the forst stage: I get the 'uncompresing kernel...OK' text and then nothing happens, the system just hangs and i have to reboot it. Actually I have to pull the power cable out as even the keyboard disappears at this point. All help appreciated... -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- BOFH excuse #13: we're waiting for [the phone company] to fix that line pgpl2N64STjoV.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: 2.2 to 2.4
On Thu, 24 May 2001 17:18:30 BST, Patrick wrote: After compiling the new kernel, I get the 'uncompresing kernel...OK' text and then nothing happens, the system just hangs and i have to reboot it. any ideas!? My system is a P200 MMX with 128MB RAM. Debian 2.2 fully upgraded with a sources.list as follows: deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib non-free deb http://security.debian.org stable/updates main contrib non-free deb http://people.debian.org/~bunk/debian potato main I am trying to upgrade from the 2.2 kernel in order to have my ADSL connection with Alcatel modem working on Linux. When I do my make bzlilo, I reboot and it ahngs at the forst stage: I get the 'uncompresing kernel...OK' text and then nothing happens, the system just hangs and i have to reboot it. Actually I have to pull the power cable out as even the keyboard disappears at this point. All help appreciated... I would reccoment upgrading to testing, then re-compiling using make-kpkg (I am assuming you used this the first time) I had no problems with 2.2.4 when I did this. -- Paul T. Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] -currently seeking employment-
Re: 2.2 to 2.4
Changing to testing/unstable did the trick. Its booted. Actually, this 200MMX with its 128MB RAM and 8 Gig hard drive was my pride and joy once upon a time. when I moved it from NT Server to Linux, most felt I had passed up on a superb desktop machine when I could hav eput any old bit of tin as a Linux server. Yet now, compliling the 2.4 kernel was akin to watching paint dry it was so slow. Makes me wonder if the 3.8 kernel in a few years will cause a P4 1500MHz to keel over in shock .-) - Original Message - From: Paul Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Patrick Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: debian-user@lists.debian.org Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2001 6:21 PM Subject: Re: 2.2 to 2.4 | On Thu, 24 May 2001 17:18:30 BST, Patrick wrote: | | | After compiling the new kernel, I get the 'uncompresing kernel...OK' text | and then nothing happens, the system just hangs and i have to reboot it. any | ideas!? | | My system is a P200 MMX with 128MB RAM. Debian 2.2 fully upgraded with a | sources.list as follows: | deb http://http.us.debian.org/debian stable main contrib non-free | deb http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US stable/non-US main contrib | non-free | deb http://security.debian.org stable/updates main contrib non-free | deb http://people.debian.org/~bunk/debian potato main | | I am trying to upgrade from the 2.2 kernel in order to have my ADSL | connection with Alcatel modem working on Linux. | | When I do my make bzlilo, I reboot and it ahngs at the forst stage: | | I get the 'uncompresing kernel...OK' text and then nothing happens, the | system just hangs and i have to reboot it. Actually I have to pull the power | cable out as even the keyboard disappears at this point. | | All help appreciated... | | | I would reccoment upgrading to testing, then re-compiling using make-kpkg | (I am assuming you used this the first time) I had no problems with 2.2.4 | when I did this. | | | | -- | Paul T. Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] | -currently seeking employment- | | | | | -- | To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] | with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED] |
Re: 2.2 to 2.4
On Thu, 24 May 2001 23:05:52 BST, Patrick wrote: Changing to testing/unstable did the trick. Its booted. Actually, this 200MMX with its 128MB RAM and 8 Gig hard drive was my pride and joy once upon a time. when I moved it from NT Server to Linux, most felt I had passed up on a superb desktop machine when I could hav eput any old bit of tin as a Linux server. Yet now, compliling the 2.4 kernel was akin to watching paint dry it was so slow. Makes me wonder if the 3.8 kernel in a few years will cause a P4 1500MHz to keel over in shock .-) Yeah, the kernel keeps on growing, it's almost like another OS I'd heard of once... -- Paul T. Wright [EMAIL PROTECTED] -currently seeking employment-
NW Driver - Porting from RedHat to Debian, Kernel-2.2 to 2.4
Hi, I am porting a Network driver from Redhat 6.2 to Debian. And also from kernel2.2 to 2.4. Since the GCC is not changed till RH6.2 version, I need to change only the kernel 2.2 to 2.4 changes. I followed the following links to port kernel2.2 to kernel2.4. But the driver does not work. Can I discuss the the imlementation details of tbusy flags in this group? __ Do You Yahoo!? Yahoo! Auctions - buy the things you want at great prices http://auctions.yahoo.com/
Re: NW Driver - Porting from RedHat to Debian, Kernel-2.2 to 2.4
NewBie Debian [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I am porting a Network driver from Redhat 6.2 to Debian. And also from kernel2.2 to 2.4. Since the GCC is not changed till RH6.2 version, I need to change only the kernel 2.2 to 2.4 changes. I followed the following links to port kernel2.2 to kernel2.4. But the driver does not work. Can I discuss the the imlementation details of tbusy flags in this group? The fact that you're porting from Red Hat to Debian isn't really relevant (we all use roughly the same kernel); the port from 2.2 to 2.4 is much more so. The version of gcc is probably only an issue if you're doing fairly weird stuff. I think you'd be better off talking to linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, but read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ first. Cheers, -- Colin Watson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Pasar del Kernel 2.2 al 2.4
Asi pues, quiero actualizar a lorita al kernel 2.4, es mas, quiero actualizar a lorita a potato 2.2r2(+) con kernel 2.4 Estoy empezando a practicar con apt-zip --y tu ayuda Santi-- Alguien puede aportar algunas preguntas o respuestas? En primer lugar te aconsejaría conseguir las fuentes del 2.4, descomprimirlas y mirar bajo Documentation/Changes (o algo así). Te dice la versíon de los programas más importantes que vas a necesitar, y cómo averiguar qué versión tienes. Incluso te dice dónde conseguirlos, pero con Debian no hace falta :) Fíjate los que necesitas actualizar, y ponte con el kernel, lo demás es lo de siempre, ir actualizando paquetes, si quieres, cuando quieras. -- Saludos Javier Fafián Alvarez | La planificación es el secreto en un Pentiun 166 | del éxito. RAM 32 Mb kernel 2.2.18 | Extraido de : Con Linux Debian woody (2.2) testing| www.barrapunto.es
Update from kernel 2.2 to 2.4 mit the stable release
Hi, I use the stable (ptotato)-Debian release. Now i wan't to upgrade to the 2.4.1 kernel (from the 2.2.18). Do i have to look at some special issues or can i compile it the same way i did it with the 2.2? Do i need some special Progs? cheers, Raffaele -- Raffaele Sandrini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the most powerfull Linux desktop at www.kde.org !!
Re: Update from kernel 2.2 to 2.4 mit the stable release
Hi, AFAIK, you only need modutils=2.4. Search the web for it, I do not know an official .deb package. Greetz, Sebastiaan On Sun, 11 Feb 2001, Raffaele Sandrini wrote: Hi, I use the stable (ptotato)-Debian release. Now i wan't to upgrade to the 2.4.1 kernel (from the 2.2.18). Do i have to look at some special issues or can i compile it the same way i did it with the 2.2? Do i need some special Progs? cheers, Raffaele -- Raffaele Sandrini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the most powerfull Linux desktop at www.kde.org !! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Update from kernel 2.2 to 2.4 mit the stable release
Le dim, 11 fév 2001 14:36:24, Sebastiaan a écrit : On Sun, 11 Feb 2001, Raffaele Sandrini wrote: Hi, I use the stable (ptotato)-Debian release. Now i wan't to upgrade to the 2.4.1 kernel (from the 2.2.18). Do i have to look at some special issues or can i compile it the same way i did it with the 2.2? Do i need some special Progs? Hi, AFAIK, you only need modutils=2.4. Search the web for it, I do not know an official .deb package. Read the Changes file which come with the new kernel (in linux/Documentation) to verify you have everything up to date for this kernel. Philippe -- Philippe Marzouk. e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Update from kernel 2.2 to 2.4 mit the stable release
On Sun, Feb 11, 2001 at 02:21:15PM +0100, Raffaele Sandrini wrote: Hi, I use the stable (ptotato)-Debian release. Now i wan't to upgrade to the 2.4.1 kernel (from the 2.2.18). Do i have to look at some special issues or can i compile it the same way i did it with the 2.2? Do i need some special Progs? After you unpack the kernel source look at the file - /usr/src/linux/Documentation/Changes It tells you exactly which upgrades you need. In my case for a 2.4.1 kernel I needed - modutils 2.4.0 e2fsprogs 1.19 on a stock Potato box. I got the source for the two packages from testing and compiled them on Potato. hth, kent -- From seeing and seeing the seeing has become so exhausted First line of The Panther - R. M. Rilke
Re: Update from kernel 2.2 to 2.4 mit the stable release
On Sun, Feb 11, 2001 at 03:31:44PM +0100, Raffaele Sandrini wrote: Hi Thanks for that help. I got the modutils rpm from kernel.org and installed it with no probs. Now i downloaded the e2fs source files from the depian ftp. I got 3 files. The main file, a diff file and a .dsc file. For what do i need the .dsc file? Is this a kind of an info file for buliding a .deb file? if yes, how do i build the .deb file that it includes the main (then compiled), the diff and the dsc file? Forget rpms. If you have it installed it is probably OK but .debs are much preferred. You can install the deb source with dpkg but the easy way is using apt-get. You should become familiar with that. It will make your life easy. In - /etc/apt/sources.list make sure you have a couple lines like - deb-src http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US unstable non-US deb-src http://http.us.debian.org/debian unstable main contrib non-free You can change unstable to testing if you like. Run - # apt-get update (I think this step is needed, if you didn't have source lines in sources.list, won't hurt anyway) Make a directory in /usr/src and move there (name doesn't matter) and run- # apt-get -b source e2fsprogs That will build a .deb you can install with - # dpkg -i whatever.deb I'm going to cc: the list as I think it is best to keep it there in case anyone else had the same question. kent -- From seeing and seeing the seeing has become so exhausted First line of The Panther - R. M. Rilke
Re: Update from kernel 2.2 to 2.4 mit the stable release
Hi Yes, ok, i will forget rpm. I tried your way over apt-get all worked fine until the compile process started. Here is the output of apt-get: Reading Package Lists... Building Dependency Tree... Need to get 977kB of source archives. dpkg-buildpackage: source package is e2fsprogs dpkg-buildpackage: source version is 1.19-3 dpkg-buildpackage: source maintainer is Yann Dirson [EMAIL PROTECTED] debian/rules clean DEB_BUILD_ARCH=i386 DEB_BUILD_GNU_CPU=i386 DEB_BUILD_GNU_SYSTEM=linux DEB_BUILD_GNU_TYPE=i386-linux DEB_HOST_ARCH=i386 DEB_HOST_GNU_CPU=i386 DEB_HOST_GNU_SYSTEM=linux DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE=i386-linux dh_testdir make: dh_testdir: Command not found make: *** [clean] Error 127 Build command 'cd e2fsprogs-1.19 dpkg-buildpackage -b -uc' failed. E: Child process failed what is dh_testdir? Do you have an advice? cheers, Raffaele On Sunday 11 February 2001 15:57, ktb wrote: On Sun, Feb 11, 2001 at 03:31:44PM +0100, Raffaele Sandrini wrote: Hi Thanks for that help. I got the modutils rpm from kernel.org and installed it with no probs. Now i downloaded the e2fs source files from the depian ftp. I got 3 files. The main file, a diff file and a .dsc file. For what do i need the .dsc file? Is this a kind of an info file for buliding a .deb file? if yes, how do i build the .deb file that it includes the main (then compiled), the diff and the dsc file? Forget rpms. If you have it installed it is probably OK but .debs are much preferred. You can install the deb source with dpkg but the easy way is using apt-get. You should become familiar with that. It will make your life easy. In - /etc/apt/sources.list make sure you have a couple lines like - deb-src http://non-us.debian.org/debian-non-US unstable non-US deb-src http://http.us.debian.org/debian unstable main contrib non-free You can change unstable to testing if you like. Run - # apt-get update (I think this step is needed, if you didn't have source lines in sources.list, won't hurt anyway) Make a directory in /usr/src and move there (name doesn't matter) and run- # apt-get -b source e2fsprogs That will build a .deb you can install with - # dpkg -i whatever.deb I'm going to cc: the list as I think it is best to keep it there in case anyone else had the same question. kent -- Raffaele Sandrini [EMAIL PROTECTED] Check out the most powerfull Linux desktop at www.kde.org !!
Re: Update from kernel 2.2 to 2.4 mit the stable release
On Sun, Feb 11, 2001 at 04:36:29PM +0100, Raffaele Sandrini wrote: Hi Yes, ok, i will forget rpm. I tried your way over apt-get all worked fine until the compile process started. Here is the output of apt-get: Reading Package Lists... Building Dependency Tree... Need to get 977kB of source archives. dpkg-buildpackage: source package is e2fsprogs dpkg-buildpackage: source version is 1.19-3 dpkg-buildpackage: source maintainer is Yann Dirson [EMAIL PROTECTED] debian/rules clean DEB_BUILD_ARCH=i386 DEB_BUILD_GNU_CPU=i386 DEB_BUILD_GNU_SYSTEM=linux DEB_BUILD_GNU_TYPE=i386-linux DEB_HOST_ARCH=i386 DEB_HOST_GNU_CPU=i386 DEB_HOST_GNU_SYSTEM=linux DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE=i386-linux dh_testdir make: dh_testdir: Command not found make: *** [clean] Error 127 Build command 'cd e2fsprogs-1.19 dpkg-buildpackage -b -uc' failed. E: Child process failed what is dh_testdir? Do you have an advice? Install the package debhelper - # apt-get install debhelper or download package and - # dpkg -i debhelper One way you can find files for packages is at - http://www.debian.org/distrib/packages in the Search the Contents of the Latest Release section. kent -- From seeing and seeing the seeing has become so exhausted First line of The Panther - R. M. Rilke
