Re: 2.6+ kernel make-tag problem
2011/12/5 John D. Hendrickson and Sara Darnell <johnandsara2@cox.net>:
> #1 If I use ./linux-2.6.38/README I get errors (see below).
> If I use ./linux-2.4.20/README I get a [good] kernel.
>
Could you be more specific? mine so called ./linux* doesn't even
exists to begin with
> #2 Nowhere can I find "root=/dev/hdax" needs to be "root=/dev/sdax" due to
> new SATA changes in driver code. Others have reported this. I found it by
> accident! (see error below)
>
IIRC it was documented few years ago (at least at time of 2.6.32). And
IIRC usage of root=/dev/sdax is deprecated (it works when you have
only one hdd, without any pendrives/external hdds connected) because
order in which devices or detected is non-deterministic (use UUID
instead)
> #3 None of the "kernel bug report" sites load in firefox (i get a 404, why?
> ipv6 only?). I can't post bug to them and have no "gpg key" either.
>
Kernel bug reports reported in Debian BTS should be fully accessible
using ipv4. If you are talking specifically about bug tracking system
of Linux Kernel then it is not something that Debian has much
influence over.
> #4 kernel source "make help" says "deb-dpkg" is an option. but it does not
> make a package. (it prepares several things for 3 or 4 potential packages
> then stops) ---- make install is also a complication.
>
> These are "every day" problems I know. But for NEWBIES. Did you know if
> they go to www.tldp.org (linux-HOWTO) one finds kernel HOWTO has be REMOVED
> ?
>
> In that respect they are making undocumented changes that break things and
> what is a newbie to do ?
>
> It's not as if things are more complicated before (consider X emacs, Tex) if
> anything far less ! It's that they are leaving ends more untied. why ?
>
> Thanks for looking have a great day !
>
> John
>
>
> From above #1:
> Kernel: arch/x86/boot/bzImage is ready (#2)
> cp: cannot stat `/usr/src/linux-2.6.38/modules.order': No such file or
> directory
> make: *** [_modinst_] Error 1
> make modules_install exited non-zero
> tail: 2.6.38-k7-x86.log: file truncated
>
> From above #2:
> "VFS cannot mount unknown block(0,0). partition is ''. Please specify root
> as param correctly."
>
> And I've seen other same problem. The message gives not a single clue what
> the problem might be. I thought it might be EZ-DRIVE.
>
> Not on the internet, not when I boot, not in linux/Documentation. How is
> one supposed to know? Linux now creates objects in /dev auto-magic so I
> cannot necessarily say ahead of time what the name of the device is
> ESPECIALLY if it's not documented. And linux's new kernel param is very
> confusing. You can't find "ide_core" anywhere in code it's "magic". And
> there's allot to do if one thinks they will trace through all VFS -> SATA
> code to find some problem !
>
/dev is working the same way for many years (maybe you meant /sys).
Also when you have only one hard drive you can be sure that it will be
under /dev/sda,
the magic starts only after you get to many devices, and only because
no one can tell ahead of time in which order devices will be
discovered.
> ---------------
>
> It's near impossible to find what "make install" will do until after you've
> already done it and can't be distributed very easily. (debian
> /usr/sbin/install_kernel ??)
>
> (I no longer "make install", have own script which makes a .deb).
> # make install
> Checking for ELILO...No
> GRUB is installed. To automatically switch to new kernels, point your
> default entry in menu.lst to /boot/arch/x86/boot/bzImage-2.6.38-k7
>
> BUT the above actually did nothing it said (no new file or menu.1st change
> either). So...
>
It doesn't say that it _made_ change in file, it only says that to
"switch to new kernel" you have to "point your default entry in
menu.lst to *". I may even add that currently there is no menu.lst
used by GRUB (it is grub.cfg)
> # make -n install
> magically becomes
> make -f scripts/Makefile.build obj=arch/x86/boot install
> sh /usr/src/linux-2.6.38/arch/x86/boot/install.sh 2.6.38-k7
> arch/x86/boot/bzImage \
> System.map "/boot"
>
> Oh! My kernel install binary is from 2001 ! I wonder if it's wise to even
> use it ?
>
If it works then I don't see any problems with it.
PS: Should parent be targeted for debian-devel ? somehow it doesn't
feel right...
darkestkhan
------------------------------------------
Feel free to CC me.
jid: darkestkhan@gmail.com
May The Source be with You.
Reply to: