Re: kernel 2.4.18 and 2.4.19 for sparc
On Thu, 30 May 2002, Paul Hedderly wrote:
> > Got the 2.4.19-pre8-ac5 patch, and tried to apply it on a standard
> > 2.4.18 kernel tree. I got A LOT of rejects!
> >
> > Alan's patches don't seem to be up to the usual standard...
>
> You DID apply 2.4.19-pre8 FIRST didn't you...
At least I did the following
# cd /usr/src
# tar -xzf linux-2.4.18.tar.gz
# cd linux
# zcat ../patch-2.4.19-pre8.gz | patch -p1
# zcat ../patch-2.4.19-pre8-ac5.gz | patch -p1
# nice -n10 fakeroot make-kpkg --revision=1:ac.1.7 kernel_image
...
/usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.18pre8ac/include/asm/pgalloc.h:261: structure has no member named `processor'
/usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.18pre8ac/include/asm/pgalloc.h:262: structure has no member named `processor'
/usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.18pre8ac/include/asm/pgalloc.h: In function `pte_alloc_one_fast':
/usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.18pre8ac/include/asm/pgalloc.h:279: structure has no member named `processor'
/usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.18pre8ac/include/asm/pgalloc.h:280: structure has no member named `processor'
/usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.18pre8ac/include/asm/pgalloc.h:282: structure has no member named `processor'
/usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.18pre8ac/include/asm/pgalloc.h: In function `free_pte_fast':
/usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.18pre8ac/include/asm/pgalloc.h:290: structure has no member named `processor'
/usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.18pre8ac/include/asm/pgalloc.h:291: structure has no member named `processor'
/usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.18pre8ac/include/asm/pgalloc.h:292: structure has no member named `processor'
init/main.c: In function `start_kernel':
init/main.c:422: structure has no member named `processor'
make[1]: *** [init/main.o] Fehler 1
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/kernel-source-2.4.18pre8ac'
make: *** [stamp-build] Fehler 2
(Sorry for the German locale ... "Fehler" means "error".)
Any hints?
Kind regards
Andreas.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: