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

Re: installing SATA modules



On Sat, Jul 10, 2004 at 04:39:28PM +0200, Thomas S wrote:
> Ok thanks to everybody for answerings, I'd like now to respond to Sven :
> 
> > Where would you like to install it ?
> 
> On a scsi drive, this is not a problem in istself (worked for installing
> Woody)...

Err, on what kind of running system.

> > What kernel are you running on it anyway ?
> 
> How to know it ? Could it be the file
> ''pool/main/P/patch_2.5.4-11_powerpc.deb'' situated in the CD (Woody 3.0r2)
> ? (Sorry I'm still a beginner and I only know basic installation of
> GNU/linux and a few UNIX...).

That is the patch program, not even remotely related to kernels. Try a
dpkg -l | grep kernel-image or even just ... | grep kernel.

Most probably you have 2.4.18 though, as this is the pmac kernel shipped
with woody if i remember well.

> Is it possible to install, in principle, for example a 2.6x.. package on a
> 2.4x.. kernel (not talking about the fact it is possible IN THIS CASE, but
> in general...anyway, if you know if it is possible IN THIS case, why not
> say...).

Yes, they may even be installed in parallel. The problem is that the 2.6
kernels need some other tools, namely initrd-tools and
module-init-tools, which may have dependency that would pull in the
whole of sarge or something. Let's see :

Package: kernel-image-2.6.7-powerpc
Depends: initrd-tools (>= 0.1.65), module-init-tools

Package: initrd-tools
Depends: coreutils | fileutils (>= 4.1.9) | stat (>= 3.0), cpio,
cramfsprogs (>= 1.1-4), dash, util-linux (>= 2.11b-3)

Package: module-init-tools
Depends: libc6 (>= 2.3.2.ds1-4)
Conflicts: modutils (<= 2.4.21-1)

Maybe it would be possible to rebuild module-init-tools for woody, and
get rid of this libc6 dependency, no idea about initrd-tools and what
the state of those packages are in woody. Check them with apt-cache show
or something such.

That said, you could as well upgrade to sarge by now if you have a fast
internet connection.

Friendly,

Sven Luther



Reply to: