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

Re: info: fixed irda-common upgrade to woody



I don't know if I had to delete the /dev/ir* nodes, or just install the 
package from the source(the scattergun approach - not recommended). I 
downloaded the source using: apt-get source irda-common, unpacked it, and 
was reading the README in the irattach directory in the source tree when 
I learned about the the /dev/ir* nodes. I noticed that the existing node 
names on my machine were different than the node names specified in the 
README . So I deleted all the existing /dev/ir* nodes, and then instead 
of trying just to install the irda-common Debian package (.deb), I went 
ahead and did the "make clean", "make all", and "make install" routine in 
the source directory. This was successful. After this, the Debian package 
installed fine. It did not make the nodes again, I did it manually, 
copying and pasting the commands from the README in irattach.
mknod /dev/ircomm0 c 161 0
mknod /dev/ircomm1 c 161 1
mknod /dev/irlpt0 c 161 17
mknod /dev/irlpt1 c 161 17

This is as far as I have gone so far, haven't yet tried to connect any 
devices.

Andy

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 9/9/01, 5:31:34 AM, Tom Allison <tallison1@twmi.rr.com> wrote regarding 
Re: info: fixed irda-common upgrade to woody:


> Andrew Taylor wrote:
> > Well I have succeeded in upgrading the irda-common.
> > I ended up deleting my /dev/ir* nodes, then did an apt-get source on the
> > package, a make clean , make all , and make install of the source
> > package.
> > After all this I selected the irda-common package from dselect, which
> > installed the .deb version over the "make" files w/no problems..
> >

> I thought that irda-common was already compiled as a .deb package.
> (probably is and I missed some steps in there...)
> But did it re-create the /dev/ir* nodes?

> I have a Palm Pilot that is an irda connection to the PC.  But I have
> had this irda-common thing stuck on a configuration problem for >6 
months.



Reply to: