Re: Unresolved symbols potato and kernel 2.0.36
On Mon, Mar 20, 2000 at 04:29:21PM +0000, David Wright wrote:
Out of everyone that got and read my message, you're the *only* one that
took offense. Well, that responded anyways. It seems most realized what I
said was extreme frustration and not a personal attack. Please accept my
messages in that light.
> > > First, is sounds to me like you are using stock debian kernels. I don't
> >
> > Well I have to use 2.0.36. 2.2 doesn't work for me, remember? And I use
> > stock kernels because it avoids another level of confusion and
> > troubleshooting in situations like this.
>
> I don't know why I should converse with a person who starts the
> conversation by grumbling "I suppose it's the height of naivite
> to expect an answer about Debian around here, but here goes...".
The reason I said that is in about two weeks' time I have posted on about
four different issues; unresolved symbols, serial port, kdm/wdm, and
other kernel/module problems. I never got *any* response from my kdm/wdm and
serial questions despite carefully worded subject lines, clips from dmesg
and serial.conf, descriptions of what I was doing, etc. They still don't
work and I have no idea where to go for support now.
> Anyway, if you refuse to compile your own kernel, then you are
> relying on the configuration options that happened to be considered
> necessary for installing linux. Just for example, is the following
> option necessary for people installing linux? Is it set in the
> packaged images? I've no idea.
I don't "refuse to compile my own kernel", I have done so (check the thread)
I just figured the kernel and modules that come from the distributor _ought_
to be matched together. It's a troubleshooting step. I was running well
with adequate hardware support (for 2.0.36, anyways) and have used stock
kernels successfully for about two years. At first I never had enough disk
space to have the source/compiled object files and all the apps I needed.
> Support for sharing serial interrupts
> CONFIG_SERIAL_SHARE_IRQ
> Some serial boards have hardware support which allows multiple dumb
> serial ports on the same board to share a single IRQ. To enable
> support for this in the serial driver, say Y here.
This is a very helpful snippet, thank you... is this in the 2.2.14 kernel?
Is this not enabled in the stock one??? If so, that's very unconventional,
for the reason you described above. It's well worth a look, though I don't
understand why I would say N here -- unless it's obfuscated somewhere. I
will certainly look harder for it this time.
> > I mean, why should I have
> > unresolved symbols when I am using a stock kernel?
>
> One could equally ask, why should you not?
Like I said, if it comes out of the box, I expect it to work together.
That's not an unrealistic expectation; it's the whole point of a
distribution. Without that, one might as well start from scratch.
> > And why does all of a
> > sudden a list full of geniuses go completely silent? Grr.
>
> Well, when I originally saw the post that starts
> "Well I upgraded, finally. And the kernel can't locate all my
> serial ports for some reason." I for one assumed that this was a
> continuing thread of conversation that I had overlooked.
> Looking back now, I might have been wrong about that.
Yep, there was more previously, not strictly "a thread". The list is a
great resource, with very helpful people... and sometimes the only place a
Debian user can go. When it sounds hollow, you're hooped.
> > I don't think this is a modules thing, it's a kernel thing (very slight
> > difference, I guess) but more importantly, it's a support thing. So far
> > this much-acclaimed Linux community has proven to be a bunch of the
> > proverbial blind men. I've been using Linux for about 5 years now, through
> > all sorts of grief and struggles, and it's just not getting much better.
> > What are the advantages of Debian again? I have a Slackware 96 CD here that
> > also runs kernel 2.0! Wow! Cool!
> >
> > Like I said, I have maybe an hour a day to spend on this; and all I do is
> > "patch the dam"
>
> Being insulted doesn't give me any motivation to make any suggestions.
> Sorry.
And yet you did -- thanks again. That's all I wanted, you know; another guy
mailed me and said "I have 2.2 working here with 4 serial ports, using shared
interrupts" That tells me volumes and I wish I had that over the weekend.
I also am reminded how e-mail can carry more weight in the reading than we
may expect or intend. I can't change what I said, and maybe I wouldn't...
the complaint and frustration still exist. The Linux community needs to do
something to make it easier and less of a constant fight for folks. I try
to help all I can (search for my posts) but there's obviously still
something lacking. Maybe I need to work on a HOWTO (though I need the
information from somewhere)!
Let me again assure you; I have no reason or intent to insult you, my
computer, on the other hand has some strong words coming. Always does, come
to think of it...
--
Jonathan Markevich <jmarkevich@mad.scientist.com>
http://members.xoom.com/JMarkevich
Reply to: