[KLUG Members] 2.4.22 On The Verge
Peter Buxton
members@kalamazoolinux.org
Mon, 1 Sep 2003 13:22:08 -0400
I think you'll be happier with 2.6.x than with all those backported 2.4
features. I've never understood why everyone else seems to have a
problem with compiling their own kernels. ;-)
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 11:50:18AM -0400, Adam Williams was only escaped
alone to tell thee:
> Yep, LVM does NOT work with 2.6.0. The on-disk format between LVM 1 &
> 2 is supposed to be compatible, but 2.6.0-test4 cannot locate the LVM
> 1 volumes. Strange. There must be some bit of glue missing.
I've not migrated volumes from LVM 1 to 2, so I can't help you here.
> 2.6.0-test4 will not compile without errors.
>
> [root@estate2 linux-2.6.0-test4]# make modules
> make[1]: `arch/i386/kernel/asm-offsets.s' is up to date.
> Building modules, stage 2.
> MODPOST
> *** Warning: "sti" [drivers/char/generic_serial.ko] undefined!
> *** Warning: "save_flags" [drivers/char/generic_serial.ko] undefined!
> *** Warning: "restore_flags" [drivers/char/generic_serial.ko] undefined!
> *** Warning: "cli" [drivers/char/generic_serial.ko] undefined!
> *** Warning: "restore_flags" [drivers/char/epca.ko] undefined!
> *** Warning: "cli" [drivers/char/epca.ko] undefined!
> *** Warning: "save_flags" [drivers/char/epca.ko] undefined!
What does your gcc toolchain look like, as per the example commands in
'./Documentation/Changes'? Aside from using gcc 3.3.1, not 2.95.3, my
toolchain is pretty close to the norm and I get no errors. (Or is Red
Hat foreporting features, now, in their 2.6.x kernel? ;-)
o Gnu C 2.95.3 # gcc --version
o Gnu make 3.78 # make --version
o binutils 2.12 # ld -v
o util-linux 2.10o # fdformat --version
o module-init-tools 0.9.9 # depmod -V
gcc (GCC) 3.3.1 20030722 (Debian prerelease)
GNU Make 3.80
GNU ld version 2.14.90.0.5 20030722 Debian GNU/Linux
fdformat from util-linux-2.11z
module-init-tools 0.9.13-pre
--
-18
Would you rather live as a normal citizen and no demigod
in Roddenberry's Federation or Lucas' Empire? -- D. Brin