Re: diffs between kernel-source-2.4.22 and source of kernel-image-2.4.22?
On Mon, 2003-10-20 at 04:32, Herbert Xu wrote: David Fokkema [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yeah, well, `even with the same config', meaning that I used the config from kernel-image-2.4.22. That should work, shouldn't it? No it's not. The precompiled images put vesafb in /lib/modules/*/initrd which means that it is loaded automatically by the initrd image. Unless you did the same with your package that would not happen. That's it! I really thought that make-kpkg took care of that. Wading through the kernel-package documentation it is not entirely clear to me how to solve this... How can you tell make-kpkg to place the vesafb.o module in the initrd directory? Thanks! David -- [Please don't CC me, I'm on the list] Hi! I'm a .signature virus. Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: diffs between kernel-source-2.4.22 and source of kernel-image-2.4.22?
On Sat, Oct 18, 2003 at 06:05:23PM +1000, Herbert Xu wrote: David Fokkema [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Installing kernel-image-2.4.22 I can boot with vga=834 resulting in a nice 1400x1050 framebuffer display with the vesa driver. However, compiling a fresh kernel from kernel-source-2.4.22 (even with the same config) results in a black screen. I can use vga=normal, so I know it You need to compile VESAFB into the kernel. Yeah, well, `even with the same config', meaning that I used the config from kernel-image-2.4.22. That should work, shouldn't it? David -- Hi! I'm a .signature virus. Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: diffs between kernel-source-2.4.22 and source of kernel-image-2.4.22?
David Fokkema [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, well, `even with the same config', meaning that I used the config
from kernel-image-2.4.22. That should work, shouldn't it?
No it's not. The precompiled images put vesafb in /lib/modules/*/initrd
which means that it is loaded automatically by the initrd image.
Unless you did the same with your package that would not happen.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmVHI~} [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: diffs between kernel-source-2.4.22 and source of kernel-image-2.4.22?
David Fokkema [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Installing kernel-image-2.4.22 I can boot with vga=834 resulting in a
nice 1400x1050 framebuffer display with the vesa driver. However,
compiling a fresh kernel from kernel-source-2.4.22 (even with the same
config) results in a black screen. I can use vga=normal, so I know it
You need to compile VESAFB into the kernel.
--
Debian GNU/Linux 3.0 is out! ( http://www.debian.org/ )
Email: Herbert Xu ~{PmVHI~} [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Home Page: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/
PGP Key: http://gondor.apana.org.au/~herbert/pubkey.txt
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: diffs between kernel-source-2.4.22 and source of kernel-image-2.4.22?
On Tue, Oct 14, 2003 at 06:44:04PM +1000, Rob Weir wrote: On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 05:37:58PM +0200, David Fokkema said Hi group, Compiling my own kernel I ran into strange difficulties. I have a laptop (asus L5800C) that's hit by the radeon driver bug resulting in black screens with standard drivers, though I don't know if this is related... Installing kernel-image-2.4.22 I can boot with vga=834 resulting in a nice 1400x1050 framebuffer display with the vesa driver. However, compiling a fresh kernel from kernel-source-2.4.22 (even with the same config) results in a black screen. I can use vga=normal, so I know it works. I took the time to compile from the sources of kernel-image-2.4.22 which builds all kinds of kernels and took a _long_ time. However, that one boots fine. You should install ccache :) Wow! Thanks! So, there must be some differences, right? I know that the sources of kernel-image are patched during the build process while the sources from kernel-source are already patched, but that should result in the same sources being used. Please enlighten me... If you look at the build-dependency tree for kernel-image-2.4.22, you'll see it's actually built from kernel-source-2.4.22, anyway. Yeah, that's what's bothering me... The only obvious difference I can think of is gcc versions. It shouldn't matter, but maybe it's built with gcc 2.95 still? Nope. I compiled both from kernel-source and from kernel-image with the same compilers. It's very strange... Thanks, David -- Hi! I'm a .signature virus. Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: diffs between kernel-source-2.4.22 and source of kernel-image-2.4.22?
On Sun, Oct 12, 2003 at 05:37:58PM +0200, David Fokkema said Hi group, Compiling my own kernel I ran into strange difficulties. I have a laptop (asus L5800C) that's hit by the radeon driver bug resulting in black screens with standard drivers, though I don't know if this is related... Installing kernel-image-2.4.22 I can boot with vga=834 resulting in a nice 1400x1050 framebuffer display with the vesa driver. However, compiling a fresh kernel from kernel-source-2.4.22 (even with the same config) results in a black screen. I can use vga=normal, so I know it works. I took the time to compile from the sources of kernel-image-2.4.22 which builds all kinds of kernels and took a _long_ time. However, that one boots fine. You should install ccache :) So, there must be some differences, right? I know that the sources of kernel-image are patched during the build process while the sources from kernel-source are already patched, but that should result in the same sources being used. Please enlighten me... If you look at the build-dependency tree for kernel-image-2.4.22, you'll see it's actually built from kernel-source-2.4.22, anyway. The only obvious difference I can think of is gcc versions. It shouldn't matter, but maybe it's built with gcc 2.95 still? -- Rob Weir [EMAIL PROTECTED] | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | Do I look like I want a CC? Words of the day: White Water Watergate smuggle counter terrorism Hi, VeriSign! [EMAIL PROTECTED] signature.asc Description: Digital signature
diffs between kernel-source-2.4.22 and source of kernel-image-2.4.22?
Hi group, Compiling my own kernel I ran into strange difficulties. I have a laptop (asus L5800C) that's hit by the radeon driver bug resulting in black screens with standard drivers, though I don't know if this is related... Installing kernel-image-2.4.22 I can boot with vga=834 resulting in a nice 1400x1050 framebuffer display with the vesa driver. However, compiling a fresh kernel from kernel-source-2.4.22 (even with the same config) results in a black screen. I can use vga=normal, so I know it works. I took the time to compile from the sources of kernel-image-2.4.22 which builds all kinds of kernels and took a _long_ time. However, that one boots fine. So, there must be some differences, right? I know that the sources of kernel-image are patched during the build process while the sources from kernel-source are already patched, but that should result in the same sources being used. Please enlighten me... TIA, David -- Hi! I'm a .signature virus. Copy me into your ~/.signature to help me spread! -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
