Hi,Today i got linux-headers-4.19 update.Doesn't it need re-building glibc that currently not triggered on my system?Thanks.
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Helmut Jarausch
wrote:
> On 07/23/2012 04:16:41 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>
>> Portage now installs sys-kernel/linux-headers-3.5.
>> sys-kernel/gentoo-sources is at 3.4.5.
>>
>> Is it even adviced to do that, installing 3.5 headers and running a 3.4
>> kernel?
On 07/23/2012 04:16:41 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
Portage now installs sys-kernel/linux-headers-3.5.
sys-kernel/gentoo-sources is at 3.4.5.
Is it even adviced to do that, installing 3.5 headers and running a
3.4 kernel? This sounds like a bad idea to me.
Why are you not using the 3.5.
On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 11:46 AM, Florian Philipp wrote:
> Am 23.07.2012 16:16, schrieb Nikos Chantziaras:
>> Portage now installs sys-kernel/linux-headers-3.5.
>> sys-kernel/gentoo-sources is at 3.4.5.
>>
>> Is it even adviced to do that, installing 3.5 headers and running a 3.4
>> kernel? This
Am 23.07.2012 16:16, schrieb Nikos Chantziaras:
> Portage now installs sys-kernel/linux-headers-3.5.
> sys-kernel/gentoo-sources is at 3.4.5.
>
> Is it even adviced to do that, installing 3.5 headers and running a 3.4
> kernel? This sounds like a bad idea to me.
>
>
Honestly, I cannot give you
Portage now installs sys-kernel/linux-headers-3.5.
sys-kernel/gentoo-sources is at 3.4.5.
Is it even adviced to do that, installing 3.5 headers and running a 3.4
kernel? This sounds like a bad idea to me.
While I'm about to do an `emerge -e @world` ...
Should I `emerge -av "=sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.38" ` ?
Any benefits over the current "sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.36.1" ?
Rgds,
--
Pandu E Poluan
~ IT Optimizer ~
• Blog : http://pepoluan.tumblr.com
• Linked-In : http://id.linkedin.com/in
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 8:09 PM, Michael P. Soulier
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm currently running kernel 2.6.25 and I have no issues with it so I don't
> really want to upgrade it just yet. I just picked up
> sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.27-r2, so I thought I'd mask out anything above
> 2.6.25 for now
Hello,
I'm currently running kernel 2.6.25 and I have no issues with it so I don't
really want to upgrade it just yet. I just picked up
sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.27-r2, so I thought I'd mask out anything above
2.6.25 for now to keep the headers in sync with the kernel that I'm running.
So I pu
At Tue, 09 Oct 2007 14:48:15 +0200 Hans-Werner Hilse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 18:50:56 -0400 Allan Gottlieb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> Does that mean I am at some risk with headers at a higher version than
>> the kernel? I followed the advice at the end of the heade
Hi,
On Mon, 08 Oct 2007 18:50:56 -0400 Allan Gottlieb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> Does that mean I am at some risk with headers at a higher version than
> the kernel? I followed the advice at the end of the headers emerge
> and remerged glibc.
Most probably no danger here. The interfaces of th
At Mon, 08 Oct 2007 23:08:40 +0200 Hans-Werner Hilse <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whether the software compiled against newer headers will still work
> depends solely on the kernel. In your example, when you also decide to
> run a 2.6.10 kernel, then the software relying on newer features (due
> t
Hi,
On Mon, 8 Oct 2007 00:44:21 +0200
Volker Armin Hemmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ok, example. I might be totally wrong, so don't believe me:
> The splice system call was added with 2.6.17 and corresponding headers. If
> you build an application that has optinal (on compile time) support
On Montag, 8. Oktober 2007, Benno Schulenberg wrote:
> Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> > But(!) you should not downgrade headers, this can cause very
> > severe problems.
>
> Could you give an example?
ok, example. I might be totally wrong, so don't believe me:
The splice system call was added with
Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> But(!) you should not downgrade headers, this can cause very
> severe problems.
Could you give an example?
Benno
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
At Sun, 07 Oct 2007 16:06:41 +0200 Volker Armin Hemmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> the linux-headers and the kernel are completly off -sync. There is no harm in
> using headers with a higher/lower version number.
> But(!) you should not downgrade headers, this can cause very severe problems.
On Sonntag, 7. Oktober 2007, Hans-Werner Hilse wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Sat, 6 Oct 2007 23:38:33 -0700
>
> "Hex Star" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > There is no harm in doing so :)
>
> If you say such things, please add a short explanation what makes you
> think that. After all this isn't IRC.
>
> In fa
Hi,
On Sat, 6 Oct 2007 23:38:33 -0700
"Hex Star" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> There is no harm in doing so :)
If you say such things, please add a short explanation what makes you
think that. After all this isn't IRC.
In fact, I would not suggest doing that. While kernel developers do
their bes
There is no harm in doing so :)
I believe there is some rule concerning the versions of gentoo-sources
vs linux-headers. Could someone please remind me of the rule or
correct my impression that such a rule exists?
I am running 2.6.20-gentoo-r7 but have installed 2.6.22-r8
emerge --verbose --ask --deep --update --newuse --tree
On Mon, 4 Dec 2006 20:42:38 -0500, David Relson wrote:
> Interesting. At the moment emerge is updating my linux-headers from
> 2.6.17-r1 to 2.6.17-r2. The first step is downloading
> linux-2.6.17.tar.bz2 which, at 41MB, seems more like a complete kernel
> source tree than just the headers. Over
On Tue, 5 Dec 2006 03:07:11 +0100
Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
> On Tuesday 05 December 2006 02:42, David Relson wrote:
> > It's interesting to compare the keywords of
> > Linux-headers-2.6.19.ebuild, i.e. "-*", to gentoo-sources-2.6.19-r1
> > which has "~amd64 ~ppc ~ppc64 ~sparc ~x86". If I'm inter
On Tuesday 05 December 2006 02:42, David Relson wrote:
> It's interesting to compare the keywords of
> Linux-headers-2.6.19.ebuild, i.e. "-*", to gentoo-sources-2.6.19-r1
> which has "~amd64 ~ppc ~ppc64 ~sparc ~x86". If I'm interpreting these
> correction, gentoo-sources is available but unstable
On Tuesday 05 December 2006 02:42, David Relson wrote:
> On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 20:23:49 -0500
>
> Statux wrote:
> > The old way of doing things was to make the following two symlinks:
> >
> > /usr/include/linux -> /usr/src/linux/include/linux
> > /usr/include/asm -> /usr/src/linux/include/asm
> >
>
On Mon, 04 Dec 2006 20:23:49 -0500
Statux wrote:
> The old way of doing things was to make the following two symlinks:
>
> /usr/include/linux -> /usr/src/linux/include/linux
> /usr/include/asm -> /usr/src/linux/include/asm
>
> Then the second would be linked to the correct set of asm headers f
On Tuesday 05 December 2006 02:23, Statux wrote:
> The old way of doing things was to make the following two symlinks:
>
> /usr/include/linux -> /usr/src/linux/include/linux
> /usr/include/asm -> /usr/src/linux/include/asm
>
> Then the second would be linked to the correct set of asm headers for
The old way of doing things was to make the following two symlinks:
/usr/include/linux -> /usr/src/linux/include/linux
/usr/include/asm -> /usr/src/linux/include/asm
Then the second would be linked to the correct set of asm headers for
your architecture, etc, inside the linux kernel source tree
On Tuesday 05 December 2006 01:53, David Relson wrote:
> Today when I ran "emerge -au world" I was surprised to see
>
> Calculating dependencies... done!
> [ebuild U ] sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.17-r2 [2.6.17-r1]
>
> because I'm presently running a 2.6.19-gentoo-r2 kernel (built from
> gentoo
Today when I ran "emerge -au world" I was surprised to see
Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild U ] sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.17-r2 [2.6.17-r1]
because I'm presently running a 2.6.19-gentoo-r2 kernel (built from
gentoo-sources-2.6.19-r1 using genkernel).
When I run "emerge -C linux-
On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 18:55:21 -0400, Jerry McBride wrote:
> Over here, a number of old favorites, like sysklogd, fail to compile...
> I am seeing a slew of missing includes and a few "syntax errors" with
> various packages.
$ grep KEY /usr/portage/sys-kernel/linux-headers/linux-headers-2.6.18.ebu
I anyone else having problems compiling anything after emerging
linux-headers-2.6.18?
Over here, a number of old favorites, like sysklogd, fail to compile...
I am seeing a slew of missing includes and a few "syntax errors" with various
packages.
I thought I'd ask before posting a bug
Hi Michael,
what Carian said, and this thread gives some good explanations:
http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.server/2139
hth, max
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
On Tue, 17 May 2005 20:57:25 -0400 Michael Haan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
| I don't understand the rtelationship b/t these two. I have
| K=2.6.9-rc14 with H=2.6.8.1-r2. H=2.6.8.1-r4 is available. I'm
| trying to go to K=2.6.12-rcX and see that H=2.6.11 is available. How
| do I know what goes w
I don't understand the rtelationship b/t these two. I have
K=2.6.9-rc14 with H=2.6.8.1-r2. H=2.6.8.1-r4 is available. I'm
trying to go to K=2.6.12-rcX and see that H=2.6.11 is available. How
do I know what goes with what?
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
On Tue, 2005-04-26 at 22:19 -0700, Robert Persson wrote:
> On April 26, 2005 03:20 am, quoth Edward Catmur:
>
> > Switch profile to /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2005.0 or
> > similar.
>
> How do I do that?
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-upgrading.xml#instructions
--
gentoo-use
On April 26, 2005 03:20 am, quoth Edward Catmur:
> Switch profile to /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2005.0 or
> similar.
How do I do that?
--
Robert Persson
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
as root
cd /etc
rm make.profile
ln -s ../usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2005.0 make.profile
On Tue, 26 Apr 2005 18:03:36 -0700
Robert Persson wrote:
> On April 26, 2005 03:20 am, quoth Edward Catmur:
>
> > Switch profile to /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2005.0 or
> > similar.
On April 26, 2005 03:20 am, quoth Edward Catmur:
> Switch profile to /usr/portage/profiles/default-linux/x86/2005.0 or
> similar.
How do I do that?
--
Robert Persson
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
On Mon, 2005-04-25 at 22:00 -0700, Robert Persson wrote:
> !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy ">=sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6" have been
> masked.
> !!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your request:
> - sys-kernel/linux-headers-2.6.8.1-r2 (masked by: profile)
> - sys-k
I am getting a "masked by: profile" error when I emerge world. Any idea what
this means and whether/how to override it? Here is what emerge throws back
at me:
zebedee root # emerge -pvu world
These are the packages that I would merge, in order:
Calculating world dependencies -
!!! All ebuild
40 matches
Mail list logo
