[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

RE: 2.6.6 kernel - which one?



Thanks.. so I used the source for 2.6.6 with the Debian patches, patched the kernel with the pmdisk patch (which worked for someone on this list), and used make-kpkg to do the build. Here's the error I get:

 CC [M]  drivers/net/dgrs.o
drivers/net/dgrs.c:148:35: dgrs_firmware.c: No such file or directory
drivers/net/dgrs.c: In function `dgrs_download':
drivers/net/dgrs.c:1051: error: `dgrs_code' undeclared (first use in this function)
drivers/net/dgrs.c:1051: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
drivers/net/dgrs.c:1051: error: for each function it appears in.)
drivers/net/dgrs.c:1051: error: `dgrs_ncode' undeclared (first use in this function)
drivers/net/dgrs.c: In function `dgrs_init_module':
drivers/net/dgrs.c:1587: error: `dgrs_firmnum' undeclared (first use in this function)
drivers/net/dgrs.c:1587: error: `dgrs_firmdate' undeclared (first use in this function)
drivers/net/dgrs.c:1587: error: `dgrs_firmver' undeclared (first use in this function)
make[3]: *** [drivers/net/dgrs.o] Error 1

Is this due to the pmdisk patch or is it something in the kernel that I downloaded (just so you know which one I'm talking abt, it's called kernel-source-2.6.6-2.6.6.orig). 

Thanks,
nirmal


-----Original Message-----
From:	Sven Luther [mailto:sven.luther@wanadoo.fr]
Sent:	Wed 6/2/2004 9:02 PM
To:	Nirmal Govind
Cc:	Sven Luther; debian-powerpc@lists.debian.org
Subject:	Re: 2.6.6 kernel - which one?
On Wed, Jun 02, 2004 at 04:39:51PM -0700, Nirmal Govind wrote:
> 
> 
> > It is probably just a problem of .config. Just use the
> > config-2.6.6-powerpc for now, and modify it as you need.
> 
> Hi.. where do I get config-2.6.6-powerpc from? apt doesn't seem to know.. google can't seem to find it either.. or did you mean the default .config that came with the kernel (the one with Debian patches)?

Well, install kernel-image-2.6.6-powerpc, and it will be found in /boot,
naturally.

Friendly,

Sven Luther






Reply to: