Quoting Rob Weir [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 09:41:38AM -0600, Jeffrey L. Taylor wrote:
Quoting Nathan E Norman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Are the Debian 2.2.20 images absolutely vanilla kernels? So what I'd
get from a Debian mirror is identical to what I'd get from
On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 09:41:38AM -0600, Jeffrey L. Taylor wrote:
Quoting Nathan E Norman [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Are the Debian 2.2.20 images absolutely vanilla kernels? So what I'd
get from a Debian mirror is identical to what I'd get from
www.kernel.org?
No, they're not. Well, the 2.4 ones
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Mon, Mar 17, 2003 at 04:42:38PM +1100, Rob Weir wrote:
No, they're not. Well, the 2.4 ones aren't, at least. Debian needs to
supply (at least) the patches *somewhere* to comply with the GPL.
apt-get source kernel-source-$KVERS should get you
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 10:51:14AM -0600, Jeffrey L. Taylor wrote:
I'm missing something. What is the name of the source for the 2.2.20
kernel?
kernel-source-2.2.20 if it's still actually in the distribution; it's
pretty ancient so it may
Quoting Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 10:51:14AM -0600, Jeffrey L. Taylor wrote:
I'm missing something. What is the name of the source for the 2.2.20
kernel?
kernel-source-2.2.20 if it's still actually in the distribution; it's
pretty ancient so
On Fri, 14 Mar 2003 02:47:41 -0800
Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First, I'm surprised that stable's still shipping with 2.2. Christ,
folks, it's 2003, let's catch up stable.
Second, you can't stop time. And as long as software's in widespread
use, it's likely actively developed.
On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 12:47:28AM -0800, Paul Johnson wrote:
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 10:51:14AM -0600, Jeffrey L. Taylor wrote:
I'm missing something. What is the name of the source for the 2.2.20
kernel?
kernel-source-2.2.20 if it's still actually in the distribution; it's
pretty
Jeffrey L. Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Quoting Paul Johnson [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Hash: SHA1
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 10:51:14AM -0600, Jeffrey L. Taylor wrote:
I'm missing something. What is the name of the source for the 2.2.20
kernel?
kernel-source-2.2.20 if it's still actually
I'm missing something. What is the name of the source for the 2.2.20
kernel? That's what comes as the default in woody and I want to tweak
it. I can find headers, patches (what good are patches w/out source
to patch?), ReiserFS and PCMCIA modules, but no source. What gives?
Jeffrey
On Thu, Mar 13, 2003 at 10:51:14AM -0600, Jeffrey L. Taylor wrote:
I'm missing something. What is the name of the source for the 2.2.20
kernel? That's what comes as the default in woody and I want to tweak
it. I can find headers, patches (what good are patches w/out source
to patch
isn't apt a good alternative to find that out?
web:~# apt-cache search kernel-source
freeswan - IPSEC utilities for FreeSWan
kernel-patch-2.2-lids - LIDS Kernel Patch
kernel-patch-2.4-lids - LIDS Kernel Patch
kernel-source-2.2.20 - Linux kernel source for version 2.2.20
On Thu, 13 Mar 2003, Jeffrey L. Taylor wrote:
I'm missing something. What is the name of the source for the 2.2.20
kernel? That's what comes as the default in woody and I want to tweak
it. I can find headers, patches (what good are patches w/out source
to patch?), ReiserFS and PCMCIA
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
isn't apt a good alternative to find that out?
Sound very reasonable, but:
~# apt-cache policy kernel-source-2.2.20
kernel-source-2.2.20:
Installed: (none)
Candidate: (none)
Version Table:
What mirror(s) are you using?
Jeffrey
Quoting Jeffrey L. Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
isn't apt a good alternative to find that out?
Sound very reasonable, but:
~# apt-cache policy kernel-source-2.2.20
kernel-source-2.2.20:
Installed: (none)
Candidate: (none)
Version
On Thu, 2003-03-13 at 21:25, Jeffrey L. Taylor wrote:
Quoting Jeffrey L. Taylor [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
isn't apt a good alternative to find that out?
Sound very reasonable, but:
~# apt-cache policy kernel-source-2.2.20
kernel
15 matches
Mail list logo