Chris == Chris L Mason [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Chris Hi Stefan,
Chris Unfortunately, no, I'm still having trouble. :( I might
Chris wind up installing a fresh potato system on another
Chris partition to see if it works in potato or not. If not, I
Chris guess I should
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 10:55:12AM +0100, Andrea Glorioso wrote:
Just did it on a Potato box a week ago, no problems whatsoever. Thought
you might wish to know.
Okay, the problem seems to be with how mkdep is being compiled. I managed
to get the kernel to compile by copying the mkdep.c
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 11:08:22AM -0500 , Chris L. Mason wrote:
Anyway, this might help others who need to compile old kernels, and
hopefully the problem will be fixed by gcc 2.95.3 final.
2.0.38 will probably not compile with gcc 2.7.2.3 very well. You might
want to try gcc272
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 05:22:22PM +0100, Petr Cech wrote:
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 11:08:22AM -0500 , Chris L. Mason wrote:
Anyway, this might help others who need to compile old kernels, and
hopefully the problem will be fixed by gcc 2.95.3 final.
2.0.38 will probably not compile with gcc
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 11:28:25AM -0500 , Chris L. Mason wrote:
Right, good point. In fact I did use gcc272 for the actual compile. But
neither gcc272 or gcc 2.95.3 compiled mkdep.c properly. Hmm, I wonder if
hmm. I wonder how could we compile it in the first place, given there was no
other
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 05:33:26PM +0100, Petr Cech wrote:
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 11:28:25AM -0500 , Chris L. Mason wrote:
Right, good point. In fact I did use gcc272 for the actual compile. But
neither gcc272 or gcc 2.95.3 compiled mkdep.c properly. Hmm, I wonder if
hmm. I wonder how
On Mon, 8 Jan 2001, John H. Robinson, IV wrote:
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 05:33:26PM +0100, Petr Cech wrote:
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 11:28:25AM -0500 , Chris L. Mason wrote:
Right, good point. In fact I did use gcc272 for the actual compile. But
neither gcc272 or gcc 2.95.3 compiled
On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 10:54:37AM -0600 , Steve Langasek wrote:
While a 2.0 kernel may not /run/ with a given glibc, I'm puzzled as to how
kernel doesn't care what you have under it. and newer glibc's should work OK
even with an older one.
Petr Cech
--
Debian
On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 02:08:17PM +0100, Stefan Frank wrote:
Hi Chris,
incidentally i tried to do the same yesterday.
I got the same error message as you, but didn't bother to try to fix it.
Maybe you need an older version of make?
If you manage to get this kernel working, would you
Hi,
I am running the latest sid and I'm trying to compile a custom 2.0.38
kernel for use with smalllinux on an ancient PS/2 386 with 4 megs of RAM.
(The default won't do because it doesn't have support for ESDI drives.)
Anyway, I'm running into a problem. I can't seem to run a make or even
10 matches
Mail list logo
