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

Re: Differences between binary images and compiled kernels



On Wednesday 15 September 2004 10:23 pm, Eric Dickner wrote:

> kernels handle hardware.  My questions are these:

> 1)  How did the seller of my original binary kernel
> compile it to be specific to certain hardware?

> RE question 1, if the answer is just in standard
> configuring why did the "make oldconfig" not work and
> leave many things out?

Not enough information.  What lead you up to running make oldconfig?  If you 
installed the vendor-supplied kernel source tree and then copied the config 
they used to compile the particular kernel you're running 
(eg. /boot/config-2.4.25-1-686) into the kernel source directory as a file 
named .config, and then ran make oldconfig, then that should have let you 
reproduce their compiled kernel exactly, and should have let you compile any 
missing modules for it.  If you did that, and it didn't work, there's no 
single explanation as to why, but one could suppose they shipped with a 
broken config.

> Now, one of the things I noted 
> was a website and credit given to an individual for
> some code...is there anyway for me to recompile to
> 2.4.x with things like that inseerted?  Certainly the
> basic proceedure that I followed doesn't give one the
> opportunity to do this.

What basic procedure was that?

Anyway, you can patch a kernel source.  I think that's what you're after.  
However, it doesn't sound like it's something you're ready to play with quite 
yet.

> RE question 2; wasn't this sort of situation the
> reason modules were introduced?  And aren't kernels
> becoming "more modularized"?  And if all that is true
> should I try another recompile to 2.6.x and see if
> there are some advances that will fix my problems?

What are your problems?  In this day and age there are few problems indeed 
that can't be solved with an off-the shelf kernel.  If the only reason you 
are fooling with this is to solve problems, then there is most likely an 
easier way.

You said something about a vendor supplied kernel, and then you said you had 
fooled around trying to compile a plain vanilla kernel.org source, but I 
missed the part where you tried one of the myriad kernel images installable 
from Debian first.

One of these perhaps:

kernel-image-2.4.27-1-386
kernel-image-2.4.27-1-586tsc
kernel-image-2.4.27-1-686
kernel-image-2.4.27-1-686-smp
kernel-image-2.4.27-1-k6
kernel-image-2.4.27-1-k7
kernel-image-2.4.27-1-k7-smp
kernel-image-2.4.27-speakup


Or one of these:

kernel-image-2.6.7-1-386
kernel-image-2.6.7-1-686
kernel-image-2.6.7-1-686-smp
kernel-image-2.6.7-1-k7
kernel-image-2.6.7-1-k7-smp
kernel-image-2.6.8-1-386
kernel-image-2.6.8-1-686
kernel-image-2.6.8-1-686-smp
kernel-image-2.6.8-1-k7
kernel-image-2.6.8-1-k7-smp

Try the easy thing first unless you're dealing with really bitchy hardware.  
If that is indeed the case, then how 'bout telling us what the hardware is.  
I'm sure there's an easier way to solve your problem than taking blind 
potshots at it.

-- 
Michael McIntyre  ----   Silvan <dmmcintyr@users.sourceforge.net>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek;  registered Linux user #243621
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/
http://rosegarden.sourceforge.net/tutorial/



Reply to: