Re: linux-2.6.21 images for m68k
On 5/17/07, Christian T. Steigies <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 10:03:02PM -0700, Brian Morris wrote:
> On 5/16/07, Christian T. Steigies <email@example.com> wrote:
> >I finally managed to build 2.6.21 for m68k, images are available for
> >from here:
> when I installed this i got an error about missing lessdisk stuffs ( that
> auto installed in my upgrade but when i looked at the description it
> said it was NOT (their caps) something you want except on a thin client.
> i found it had trashed some of my /etc/hosts* files. so i got rid of it.)
> however that your package complained about it, it seems to have installed
> itself ok anyway.
> It looks to me like if you want your LAN support to be optional then you
> do not want lessdisk package. (if you want to be possibly independent
> of your server machine).
What is the lessdisk package? I have never heard of it. The only place I
find lessdisk mentioned is sdm, but that has nothing to do with linx-images.
sorry, it is lessdisks (plural). and not just plain lessdisks but a bunch of
packages lessdisks*. if you have unstable in sources.list look at
% aptitude show "~nlessdisk"
they only appear in unstable or oldstable, or search with debian search
in iceweasel browser.
These are the depends of the mac linux-image:
Depends: module-init-tools (>= 0.9.13)
Suggests: linux-doc-2.6.21, vmelilo, fdutils
Provides: linux-image, linux-image-2.6, linux-modules-2.6.21-1-mac
No lessdisk, are you talking about fdisk?
I don't know, I purged the lessdisks stuff and dpkg-list shows it as purged.
But worse than i reported below is that it is still complain that the
2.6.21 is not completed configured and so it retries after every time
i install any packages. even though i am running the 21.
it is some sort of postinstall script triggered. but the script is not
actually exist. something is left over of lessdisks that is looking for it.
i think that the automatic dependency resolvers of the upgrading can
do strange things so it is better to use aptitude for big upgrade, rather
than apt-get, if you have the patience for it. I think much of slowness
due to huge huge numbers of packages dependency tree to parse.
especially if you have two or more distributions mix (upgrade from sarge
to combination etch/unstable I did). Another reason it is good to have
CD because for basic tests you can get by with much less than the
full package set, just the first two CD that is 1/4 as much to parse.
If you have jigdo then you download just the change packages of cd image.
Also reading packages from cd is almost always much faster than downloading
individual files. I want still to try and figure a way to make
a reasonable testing cd even if it is only for upgrade -- no installer support.
And what is vmelilo doing in a mac package? It's in all all m68k packages...
also I notice that you are still compiling these kernels with gcc3.3...
is that 4.1 is really so bad or is it mostly that you have not completely
upgraded. or is it that if compile with 4.1 then some backward compatibility
lost for people testing kernels with sarge prior to upgrading.
If I felt ambitious i might try rebuilding your kernel with 4.1. I
last night from upstream. that took 10min on g3powerbook and 2 hour on
Q630. but it works fine. it takes 45min or so to build kernel for ppc on my
g4. so that would i guess a day or so w/out use of cross compiler.
( i mean i build ppc version on g3, i do not have cross compiler quite going).
(needs update/ rebuild )