Re: 2.1.x kernels
On 24 Nov 1997, Ian Willmott wrote:
> Could someone who has successfully compiled and run a version 2.1 kernel
> post their procedure to this list? When I tried to compile 2.1.65 (from
> www.kernel.org), it bombed out on the first file due to some header
> conflict. I have gcc version 184.108.40.206-10 , if that matters. I understood
> that the 2.1 kernel sources do not require any alpha-specific patches,
> is this not correct?
Hmmm...I ran into a minor snag with 2.1.65, but nothing that wasn't easily
solved (it bombed with some tga-related function unresolved -- fixed by
including VT support which I had omitted accidentally while configuring).
Oh, another thing I ran into also while compiling a kernel for someone
else -- the Adaptec 2940 driver has some memory mapped stuff set up, but
not used. That code won't compile, so it had to be commented out. E-mail
me your configuration and I'll see if I can compile one and figure out the
> Which kernel versions seem to be stable on the alpha? I need 2.1.x to
> run the DEC UNIX netscape binary. I tried both arena and chimera, but
> they don't seem to understand proxy servers and are prone to segfault.
I run 2.1.65 now and was running 2.1.60 for awhile without trouble. In
fact, I've been running a development kernel on my Alpha since 2.1.49.
I used to flip-flop between stable and development kernels, but now I
stick to the 2.1's.
> Maybe 2.1 kernel binaries for the more common alpha systems should be
> placed on ftp.debian.org , along with the 2.0 versions.
Not a bad idea. I'll pluck the configs off of master and get started on
that soon :)
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .