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

Re: Linux 2.0.35 & slink



	Subject: Re: Linux 2.0.35 & slink
	Date: Fri, Oct 16, 1998 at 11:00:12AM -0700

In reply to:Bob Nielsen

Quoting Bob Nielsen(nielsen@primenet.com):
> 
> On Fri, 16 Oct 1998 wtopa@ix.netcom.com wrote:
> 
> > G'day deb'ers
> > 
> >   I have just upgraded to slink and compiled the 2.0.35 kernel.  I
> > find a small problem with it. 
> > 
> >     Dist          Kernel         Bigomips
> >    ------        --------       ----------
> > Debian 2.0     linux 2.0.34       149.91
> > Debian 2.0     linux 2.0.35       130.66 ?????
> > Slackware 3.3  linux 2.0.34       149.91
> > Slackware 3.3  linux 2.0.35       149.91 
> > Slackware 3.5  linux 2.0.35       149.91
> > Slackware 3.5  linux 2.1.125      149.91
> > 
> > 
> > The above are on the same system and are booted via lilo and/or boot
> > disks.  The above are the results from cat /proc/cpuinfo.
> > 
> > I know that Kernel-2.0.35 is in the unstable tree of Debian but doubt
> > that this should matter.(?)  Has anyone else noticed this?
> > 
> > I will now try a non-deb kernel tarball and see if that solves the
> > problem.
> 
> No problem here with 2.0.35, I get 59.8 with all kernels (P150)  Mine is
> compiled by make-kpkg from a tarball on a slink system (with a handful of 
> packages held back).
> 

 Whoops, you got me.  I have been on Slackware too long.  Ok so thanks
to you I remembered make-kpkg and used that.  But the results are the
same 130.66. What the heck would cause that? I made the comfig file
the same as all the others, same modules and all.

> > 
> > Oh, one last question.  I say an announcement for apt-0.1.7 this
> > morning.  As of yet I can't find it on debian.org or any ftp sites.
> > How long does it usually take for the software to catch up with the
> > announcements?  The anouncement did not mention a location for the
> > software.
> 
> The update to unstable normally happens daily, much less often for stable.
> I usually find the new files available in the early afternoon (MST), but
> some mirrors are slower at updating than others. 

Thanks, I will look for it later tonight, when the net is quiet.

Appreciate the help Bob.  Any ideas as to what could cause this??
> 
> I expect you will find it in unstable/.../admin later today.
> 
> Bob
> 
> ----
> Bob Nielsen                 Internet: nielsen@primenet.com
> Tucson, AZ                  AMPRnet:  w6swe@w6swe.ampr.org
> DM42nh                      http://www.primenet.com/~nielsen
> 
> 

-- 
"It's not just a computer -- it's your ass."
                -- Cal Keegan
_______________________________________________________
Wayne T. Topa <wtopa@ix.netcom.com>


Reply to: