Re: srm nightmare, milo & kernel future questions
On Sunday 15 June 2003 03:49 am, Chris Hecker wrote:
> >Don't use gcc-2.9.5 on alpha. I just does not work. Use 3.2 for instead.
>
> Yeah, I searched and found that right after posting, thanks. But, from
> reading about it on various list archives, it seems unclear whether you can
> just install 3.2 out of unstable without it replacing 2.95. I read the
> "transition" document and was slightly confused. I'd really rather not
> hose this machine any farther. If I can just install it in addition to
> 2.95 without breaking a stock woody install, then I'll try it. The C++ ABI
> change scares me. Or somebody could just send me a binary srm_env.o built
> against the generic 2.4.18 (can you tell I come from the windows
> world? :), assuming that's a safe thing to do.
generic 2.4.18?? <cough> <cough> Generic 2.4.18 has a ton of bits missing
for the alpha architecture. When we did the HP updated kernel 2.4.18 for
RH-7.2 on alpha we added 27 patches to fix various bugs. If you are going to
use a generic kernel, I would like to suggest that you try 2.4.21 which has
most of the previously mentioned patches. We hope to get the remaining
patches into 2.4.22.
I hope this helps.
Best Regards,
--George
Reply to: