Re: Kernel Compile
On Sat, 16 Jan 1999, Nidge Jones wrote:
> Pann McCuaig Writes..
>
> > 2.0.34 works fine on our hamm boxes and I won't be upgrading kernels
> > until slink is released and we (eventually) upgrade our boxes to slink.
> > If you need features in 2.0.36 then you'll have to figure this out.
2.0.36 should compile without problems on a hamm system.
>
> OK fair enough. Least I am a little wiser.
>
> However, will someone please explain why other source code I have fails to
> compile. I think it's all to do with /usr/include stuff. But why would these
> work OK on 1.3.1 and not 2.0!
>
> There must be a way to solve this! Or does running Debian 2.0 put you in a
> situation where many source tree's are useless.
>
> I have sat trying to recompile things today for the hell of it. And much of
> the source I have is now shagged since I upgraded to 2.0 ! WHY !
>
> I *COULD* under 1.3.1 grab source code from Sunsite (or the likes) and
> compile it up with little or no problems. But not now. I have heaps of stuff
> which just won't compile. Yet other stuff is fine.
>
> It is all very confusing if you ask me.... and very very annoying.
>
> I am (sorry was) forever compiling something, but since upgrading to Debian
> 2.0 my compiler (or something) has become broken.
>
> There must be someone on here that can explain why !
>
> The Debian FAQ says that I can still compile my old code OK after an upgrade
> to 2.0. But I can't. WHY NOT !
>
I don't have a clue as to why you are having problems compiling the
kernel, but as to other software, if the source code is compatible with
libc6, you should have no problems. If it is libc5, then you will probably
have to edit the Makefile to use libc5-altdev, etc. (in oldlibs) instead
of the default libc6-dev. I believe this is covered in one of the FAQs.
If you upgraded using autoup.sh or the bo version of apt-get, you should
have gotten the upgraded libc5 stuff.
I expect that much libc5 source can be upgraded to compile with libc6.
After all, this is a large part of what the Debian developers did to
create 2.0, but it isn't necessarily easy.
The fact the even the kernel won't compile would indicate that something
broke in your upgrade process, but this is quite untypical (I've never had
it happen to me, at least, in many 1.2-1.3, 1.3-2.0 and 2.0-2.1
upgrades).
Bob
----
Bob Nielsen Internet: nielsen@primenet.com
Tucson, AZ AMPRnet: w6swe@w6swe.ampr.org
DM42nh http://www.primenet.com/~nielsen
Reply to: