Menu
▾
▴
devil-linux-develop — developer discussions
You can subscribe to this list here.
| 2001 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
(55) |
Oct
(44) |
Nov
(156) |
Dec
(123) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2002 |
Jan
(130) |
Feb
(156) |
Mar
(162) |
Apr
(171) |
May
(97) |
Jun
(127) |
Jul
(58) |
Aug
(81) |
Sep
(86) |
Oct
(45) |
Nov
(41) |
Dec
(84) |
| 2003 |
Jan
(71) |
Feb
(87) |
Mar
(133) |
Apr
(152) |
May
(151) |
Jun
(232) |
Jul
(320) |
Aug
(237) |
Sep
(271) |
Oct
(536) |
Nov
(301) |
Dec
(393) |
| 2004 |
Jan
(393) |
Feb
(184) |
Mar
(314) |
Apr
(225) |
May
(139) |
Jun
(77) |
Jul
(87) |
Aug
(75) |
Sep
(139) |
Oct
(50) |
Nov
(8) |
Dec
(28) |
| 2005 |
Jan
(66) |
Feb
(63) |
Mar
(14) |
Apr
(14) |
May
(8) |
Jun
(23) |
Jul
(21) |
Aug
(6) |
Sep
(29) |
Oct
(55) |
Nov
(38) |
Dec
(8) |
| 2006 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
(10) |
Mar
(1) |
Apr
(15) |
May
(32) |
Jun
(44) |
Jul
(11) |
Aug
(8) |
Sep
(9) |
Oct
(14) |
Nov
(4) |
Dec
(3) |
| 2007 |
Jan
(3) |
Feb
(3) |
Mar
(2) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
(35) |
Aug
(49) |
Sep
(8) |
Oct
(42) |
Nov
(44) |
Dec
(7) |
| 2008 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
(7) |
Mar
(8) |
Apr
(80) |
May
(74) |
Jun
(29) |
Jul
(5) |
Aug
(7) |
Sep
(6) |
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2009 |
Jan
(8) |
Feb
(19) |
Mar
(3) |
Apr
(24) |
May
(22) |
Jun
(23) |
Jul
(8) |
Aug
(23) |
Sep
(8) |
Oct
(27) |
Nov
(52) |
Dec
(27) |
| 2010 |
Jan
(36) |
Feb
(29) |
Mar
(17) |
Apr
(28) |
May
(21) |
Jun
(4) |
Jul
|
Aug
(28) |
Sep
(18) |
Oct
(6) |
Nov
(34) |
Dec
(16) |
| 2011 |
Jan
(18) |
Feb
(12) |
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
(9) |
Jun
(1) |
Jul
(5) |
Aug
(5) |
Sep
(7) |
Oct
(16) |
Nov
(26) |
Dec
(17) |
| 2012 |
Jan
(6) |
Feb
(34) |
Mar
(52) |
Apr
(10) |
May
(3) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
|
Oct
(4) |
Nov
(1) |
Dec
(4) |
| 2013 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
(5) |
May
(4) |
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(14) |
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2014 |
Jan
|
Feb
(2) |
Mar
(5) |
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
(3) |
Dec
(11) |
| 2015 |
Jan
(5) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
(1) |
Sep
(1) |
Oct
(1) |
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2016 |
Jan
|
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
(2) |
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2017 |
Jan
(1) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
| 2018 |
Jan
(2) |
Feb
|
Mar
|
Apr
|
May
|
Jun
|
Jul
|
Aug
|
Sep
|
Oct
|
Nov
|
Dec
|
|
From: <hzu...@ra...> - 2004-03-03 16:34:49
|
On 03/03/2004 11:09:30 AM Oliver Jehle wrote: >On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 16:49, Oliver Jehle wrote: >> > >perhaps a feature of a newer gcc version .. .-( >> > >> > I try to look into it it tonight. >> > >> > Heiko >> >> will also try on my 3.3.1 suse gcc if i can compile lvm2 with the >kernel >> headers of 2.6.3 > >the change was between 2.6.1 and 2.6.2.. but here compared with 2.6.3 Can you check it against the current CVS version? They probably fixed it already and we just need to extract the patch. Heiko |
|
From: Oliver J. <oli...@mo...> - 2004-03-03 16:23:15
|
On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 16:49, Oliver Jehle wrote:
> > >perhaps a feature of a newer gcc version .. .-(
> >
> > I try to look into it it tonight.
> >
> > Heiko
>
> will also try on my 3.3.1 suse gcc if i can compile lvm2 with the kernel
> headers of 2.6.3
the change was between 2.6.1 and 2.6.2.. but here compared with 2.6.3
--- /usr/src/linux-2.6.1/include/linux/byteorder/swab.h 2003-12-18
03:59:57.000000000 +0100
+++ swab.h 2004-02-18 04:59:53.000000000 +0100
@@ -15,6 +15,8 @@
*
*/
+#include <linux/compiler.h>
+
/* casts are necessary for constants, because we never know how for
sure
* how U/UL/ULL map to __u16, __u32, __u64. At least not in a portable
way.
*/
@@ -128,7 +130,7 @@
#endif /* OPTIMIZE */
-static __inline__ __const__ __u16 __fswab16(__u16 x)
+static __inline__ __attribute_const__ __u16 __fswab16(__u16 x)
{
return __arch__swab16(x);
}
@@ -141,7 +143,7 @@
__arch__swab16s(addr);
}
-static __inline__ __const__ __u32 __fswab32(__u32 x)
+static __inline__ __attribute_const__ __u32 __fswab32(__u32 x)
{
return __arch__swab32(x);
}
@@ -155,7 +157,7 @@
}
#ifdef __BYTEORDER_HAS_U64__
-static __inline__ __const__ __u64 __fswab64(__u64 x)
+static __inline__ __attribute_const__ __u64 __fswab64(__u64 x)
{
# ifdef __SWAB_64_THRU_32__
__u32 h = x >> 32;
|
|
From: Oliver J. <oli...@mo...> - 2004-03-03 16:16:30
|
On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 16:49, Oliver Jehle wrote: > > >perhaps a feature of a newer gcc version .. .-( > > > > I try to look into it it tonight. > > > > Heiko > > will also try on my 3.3.1 suse gcc if i can compile lvm2 with the kernel > headers of 2.6.3 same problem as on devil 3.3.2 gcc... so it looks really like a header problem :-( |
|
From: Oliver J. <oli...@mo...> - 2004-03-03 16:03:30
|
> >perhaps a feature of a newer gcc version .. .-( > > I try to look into it it tonight. > > Heiko will also try on my 3.3.1 suse gcc if i can compile lvm2 with the kernel headers of 2.6.3 ... PS: perhaps a ticket is to expensive only to see a software package compiles :-)) |
|
From: <hzu...@ra...> - 2004-03-03 15:59:39
|
On 03/03/2004 10:18:49 AM Oliver Jehle wrote: >On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 16:09, hzu...@ra... wrote: >> On 03/03/2004 08:06:20 AM Oliver Jehle wrote: >> >Hi >> > >> >only a small notice... i can build python with kernel 2.6 >> >i got a plain lfssystem and the latest scripts from the cvs... >> >> I still don't believe you ;-) >> I guess I have to give this another try... >> >i can invite you to visit me to have a look on the screen !!! no problem >!!! you have to bring the beer !!! Sure, just get ticket on my name. Raleigh, NC to whatever airport is next to you. ;-) >> >another bad thing i found... >> >in kernel 2.6.3 there are bad kernel headers.... but will give >> >a report what not compiles and what compiles after its finished. >> Libnet doesn't work and I already send those guys an email. >Unfortunately >> nobody responded.... :-(( >> >> >until now.. all these ones have the same problem.... byteorder/swab.h >in the linux include of 2.6.3... so its not really a problem of >libnet... > >libnet >LVM2 >cdrtools >cutter >hdparam >iproute2 >iputils >ppp > >there must be a change between 2.6.2 and 2.6.3 in the kernel headers... >because with 2.6.2 we don't have this problem... > >perhaps a feature of a newer gcc version .. .-( I try to look into it it tonight. Heiko |
|
From: Oliver J. <oli...@mo...> - 2004-03-03 15:32:27
|
On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 16:09, hzu...@ra... wrote: > On 03/03/2004 08:06:20 AM Oliver Jehle wrote: > >Hi > > > >only a small notice... i can build python with kernel 2.6 > >i got a plain lfssystem and the latest scripts from the cvs... > > I still don't believe you ;-) > I guess I have to give this another try... > i can invite you to visit me to have a look on the screen !!! no problem !!! you have to bring the beer !!! > >another bad thing i found... > >in kernel 2.6.3 there are bad kernel headers.... but will give > >a report what not compiles and what compiles after its finished. > Libnet doesn't work and I already send those guys an email. Unfortunately > nobody responded.... :-(( > > until now.. all these ones have the same problem.... byteorder/swab.h in the linux include of 2.6.3... so its not really a problem of libnet... libnet LVM2 cdrtools cutter hdparam iproute2 iputils ppp there must be a change between 2.6.2 and 2.6.3 in the kernel headers... because with 2.6.2 we don't have this problem... perhaps a feature of a newer gcc version .. .-( |
|
From: <hzu...@ra...> - 2004-03-03 15:25:18
|
On 03/03/2004 08:06:20 AM Oliver Jehle wrote: >Hi > >only a small notice... i can build python with kernel 2.6 >i got a plain lfssystem and the latest scripts from the cvs... I still don't believe you ;-) I guess I have to give this another try... >another bad thing i found... >in kernel 2.6.3 there are bad kernel headers.... but will give >a report what not compiles and what compiles after its finished. Libnet doesn't work and I already send those guys an email. Unfortunately nobody responded.... :-(( Heiko |
|
From: Oliver J. <oli...@mo...> - 2004-03-03 15:16:00
|
On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 15:28, Bruce Smith wrote: > > > > please update the package of bind... > > > > > > > > bind 9.2.3 is available since october 2003.... > > > > > > > > www.isc.org > > > > > > We tried that back then and couldn't make 9.2.3 run correctly, > > > so we went back to 9.2.2. Problems with libraries not found. > > > > > do you remember which ones ??? > > i've upgraded a lot of system manually from 9.2.2 to 9.2.3... > > Read this thread: > > http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=6391030 > - BS perhaps --enable-libbind in configure helps ... will do a test with it after my 2.6 compile run is finished... |
|
From: <hzu...@ra...> - 2004-03-03 15:00:34
|
On 03/03/2004 03:08:11 AM Oliver Jehle wrote: >please update the package of bind... > >bind 9.2.3 is available since october 2003.... > >www.isc.org > Actually we did this and reverted back. There were problems with the 9.2.3 package. Can you test it? Heiko |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2004-03-03 14:41:33
|
> > > please update the package of bind... > > > > > > bind 9.2.3 is available since october 2003.... > > > > > > www.isc.org > > > > We tried that back then and couldn't make 9.2.3 run correctly, > > so we went back to 9.2.2. Problems with libraries not found. > > > do you remember which ones ??? > i've upgraded a lot of system manually from 9.2.2 to 9.2.3... Read this thread: http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/message.php?msg_id=6391030 - BS |
|
From: <hzu...@ra...> - 2004-03-03 14:38:31
|
On 03/02/2004 05:48:35 PM Roland Pabel wrote: >On Monday 01 March 2004 03:47, Heiko Zuerker wrote: >> Roland Pabel wrote: >> > Hi, >> > I finally understood the flow of scripts when the system boots. >Scripts >> > in boot.d/ are never called (what puzzled me at first, because I'm >used >> > to them being called at some point in other distros - before rcX.d >> > scripts are called, in SuSE). I don't know why you chose rcS.d as >the >> > place for system startup scripts, other distros use it for Single >user >> > mode and boot.d exactly for that job...maybe the DL-way is even the >right >> > way(tm), couldn't find info... >> >> I don't even remember why I did it this way, but I have no problem >doing >> it the same way as the others. If you want you can correct it and send >> us the patch. >I think I know now why rcS.d is a good choice : LSB doesn't specify what >runlevel S is for (and suse,redhat and debian use it differently), but >insserv says it's used for booting directly into Single-User. Switching >to >single-user from another runlevel should be going into runlevel 1... >Since you can't boot into S with the current isolinux config, it's >virtually >free. >> > But anyways, could we have boot.d/* called, either by the end >> > of /etc/init.d/boot or by inittab entry >> > "si::bootwait:/etc/init.d/boot.rc"? Roland >> >> I think the best approach would be correcting the scripts to use >boot.d >> instead of rcS.d and then you can just "plug-in" your stuff. >Unless you want to support runlevel S the way Suse uses it, I don't see >any >reason to 'correct' it (I'd go with 'Never change a running system'). >The boot.d/ scripts can simply be enabled additionally... >Roland You're right. But it probably makes sense to do it the same way as the other distros, so it's easier for our users. Heiko |
|
From: Oliver J. <oli...@mo...> - 2004-03-03 14:28:09
|
On Wed, 2004-03-03 at 15:00, Bruce Smith wrote: > > please update the package of bind... > > > > bind 9.2.3 is available since october 2003.... > > > > www.isc.org > > We tried that back then and couldn't make 9.2.3 run correctly, > so we went back to 9.2.2. Problems with libraries not found. > do you remember which ones ??? i've upgraded a lot of system manually from 9.2.2 to 9.2.3... |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2004-03-03 14:13:26
|
> please update the package of bind... > > bind 9.2.3 is available since october 2003.... > > www.isc.org We tried that back then and couldn't make 9.2.3 run correctly, so we went back to 9.2.2. Problems with libraries not found. - BS |
|
From: Oliver J. <oli...@mo...> - 2004-03-03 13:20:01
|
Hi only a small notice... i can build python with kernel 2.6 i got a plain lfssystem and the latest scripts from the cvs... another bad thing i found... in kernel 2.6.3 there are bad kernel headers.... but will give a report what not compiles and what compiles after its finished. oliver |
|
From: Oliver J. <oli...@mo...> - 2004-03-03 08:21:37
|
please update the package of bind... bind 9.2.3 is available since october 2003.... www.isc.org thanx oliver |
|
From: Oliver J. <oli...@mo...> - 2004-03-03 06:39:34
|
add a missing driver... hangs in make prepare Index: scripts/config/linux-2.6/config_linux.alsa =================================================================== RCS file: /cvsroot/devil-linux/build/scripts/config/linux-2.6/config_linux.alsa,v retrieving revision 1.1 diff -u -r1.1 config_linux.alsa --- scripts/config/linux-2.6/config_linux.alsa 31 Jan 2004 01:02:02 -0000 1.1 +++ scripts/config/linux-2.6/config_linux.alsa 3 Mar 2004 06:16:56 -0000 @@ -64,6 +64,7 @@ # CONFIG_SND_ALI5451=m CONFIG_SND_AZT3328=m +CONFIG_SND_BT87X=m CONFIG_SND_CS46XX=m CONFIG_SND_CS46XX_NEW_DSP=y CONFIG_SND_CS4281=m |
|
From: Oliver J. <oli...@mo...> - 2004-03-03 06:30:19
|
> One of the big advantages I found with FreeS/wan is the documentation and in > particular the interoperability guides - they've helped me out in many cases. to make it clear, i'm not fixed on kame or freeswan.... i personally prefer a solution compatible with the kernel instead of patching the kernel. i read something about freeswan compatibility with 2.6 in version 2.06.. so if you have some free time :-) please contribute !!!!!!! a lot of freeswan users will be happy to migrate to 2.6 without changeing the vpn configuration. i will concentrate my work on kame/ipsec-tools, because it looks like the perfered solution for the kernel developers involved in this area. > I'm unfamiliar with Kame, but in my brief reading it appears to be easier to > configure, but is not as well tested as FreeS/wan. ask the bsd people for test results !! they use racoon long time... > There may still be some > issues with x509 certs and nat traversal, but I'm sure these will be solved > in time... > nat traversal is prepared for merge (in cvs).... x509 certs looks working for me... > So, I would add my voice to the concensus and recommend DL sticks to FreeS/wan > for kernel 2.4 and see where 2.6 goes. there should be no disussion if freeswan or kame is or should be the one and only solution... for 2.4 freeswan is the one and only maintained solution. so its the best solution... and 2.4 is in maintained mode, so its dead for new features now. (and backports). Oliver |
|
From: Martin G. <sou...@gl...> - 2004-03-03 03:38:25
|
On March 2, 2004 14:01, Friedrich Lobenstock wrote: > Oliver Jehle wrote on 02.03.2004 15:40 MET: > > i would rather suggest > > > > 2.4 = freeswan (until a maintained 2.6 ipsec backport is available) > > I think FreeSwan will still have the lead in the 2.4 arena. Anything > backported will probably not be as stable. Don't write off FreeS/wan just quite yet - some of the developers have forked FreeS/wan into a new project - openswan and will continue their work there. One of the big advantages I found with FreeS/wan is the documentation and in particular the interoperability guides - they've helped me out in many cases. I'm unfamiliar with Kame, but in my brief reading it appears to be easier to configure, but is not as well tested as FreeS/wan. There may still be some issues with x509 certs and nat traversal, but I'm sure these will be solved in time... So, I would add my voice to the concensus and recommend DL sticks to FreeS/wan for kernel 2.4 and see where 2.6 goes. Martin |
|
From: Roland P. <pa...@ta...> - 2004-03-02 23:01:40
|
On Monday 01 March 2004 03:47, Heiko Zuerker wrote: > Roland Pabel wrote: > > Hi, > > I finally understood the flow of scripts when the system boots. Scripts > > in boot.d/ are never called (what puzzled me at first, because I'm used > > to them being called at some point in other distros - before rcX.d > > scripts are called, in SuSE). I don't know why you chose rcS.d as the > > place for system startup scripts, other distros use it for Single user > > mode and boot.d exactly for that job...maybe the DL-way is even the right > > way(tm), couldn't find info... > > I don't even remember why I did it this way, but I have no problem doing > it the same way as the others. If you want you can correct it and send > us the patch. I think I know now why rcS.d is a good choice : LSB doesn't specify what runlevel S is for (and suse,redhat and debian use it differently), but insserv says it's used for booting directly into Single-User. Switching to single-user from another runlevel should be going into runlevel 1... Since you can't boot into S with the current isolinux config, it's virtually free. > > But anyways, could we have boot.d/* called, either by the end > > of /etc/init.d/boot or by inittab entry > > "si::bootwait:/etc/init.d/boot.rc"? Roland > > I think the best approach would be correcting the scripts to use boot.d > instead of rcS.d and then you can just "plug-in" your stuff. Unless you want to support runlevel S the way Suse uses it, I don't see any reason to 'correct' it (I'd go with 'Never change a running system'). The boot.d/ scripts can simply be enabled additionally... Roland -- ICQ UIN 49339118 Linux Counter #88774 GPG-Key 1024D/59C6AFA6 2003-02-07 Roland Pabel <ro...@pa...> |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2004-03-02 22:23:49
|
> >> >> > A fresh (mrproper) compile hangs during make prepare, asking: > >> >> > > >> >> > MAC system integration (none, direct, hook) [none] (NEW) > >> >> > >> >> I just ran one this night and it worked fine... > >> >> > >> >> The fix is actually in CVS, but that one is at least 1 week old. > >> > > >> > Nope, I updated from CVS this morning (and again now to make sure - > >> > nothing new was downloaded). The real CVS server, not the mirror. :-) > >> > > >> > mrproper and new lfssystem too. I've tried it 3 times so far with the > >> > same results, once on kernel 2.6, and twice on kernel 2.4. > >> > > >> > Maybe it's the combinations of selections (menuconfig) I have? > >> > >> I just verified it and I actually forgott to update the file config_pax > >> for the 2.4 kernel. > >> I updated it in CVS and it should work now. > > > > I just updated from CVS again, another make mrproper ..., > > and it does the same thing (2.4 kernel): > > > > # tail -n1 tmp/LOGS/build/prepare > > > > MAC system integration (none, direct, hook) [none] (NEW) > > What the.... > > Are you using PAX or GRSecurity? PAX. > I think I fixed it this time, I copy'n'pasted the variables from > grsecurity to pax. Unfortunately they used different names... > > Anyway, it's in CVS. It seems to be working now. (it's past that point) > I'm not at home tonight, so you most likely have to fix (my) bugs for the > rest of the day. ;-) I'm not home tonight either, so the bugs will have to wait. :-) - BS |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2004-03-02 22:13:13
|
>> >> > A fresh (mrproper) compile hangs during make prepare, asking: >> >> > >> >> > MAC system integration (none, direct, hook) [none] (NEW) >> >> >> >> I just ran one this night and it worked fine... >> >> >> >> The fix is actually in CVS, but that one is at least 1 week old. >> > >> > Nope, I updated from CVS this morning (and again now to make sure - >> > nothing new was downloaded). The real CVS server, not the mirror. :-) >> > >> > mrproper and new lfssystem too. I've tried it 3 times so far with the >> > same results, once on kernel 2.6, and twice on kernel 2.4. >> > >> > Maybe it's the combinations of selections (menuconfig) I have? >> >> I just verified it and I actually forgott to update the file config_pax >> for the 2.4 kernel. >> I updated it in CVS and it should work now. > > I just updated from CVS again, another make mrproper ..., > and it does the same thing (2.4 kernel): > > # tail -n1 tmp/LOGS/build/prepare > > MAC system integration (none, direct, hook) [none] (NEW) What the.... Are you using PAX or GRSecurity? I think I fixed it this time, I copy'n'pasted the variables from grsecurity to pax. Unfortunately they used different names... Anyway, it's in CVS. I'm not at home tonight, so you most likely have to fix (my) bugs for the rest of the day. ;-) -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org |
|
From: Bruce S. <bw...@ar...> - 2004-03-02 21:44:28
|
> >> > A fresh (mrproper) compile hangs during make prepare, asking: > >> > > >> > MAC system integration (none, direct, hook) [none] (NEW) > >> > >> I just ran one this night and it worked fine... > >> > >> The fix is actually in CVS, but that one is at least 1 week old. > > > > Nope, I updated from CVS this morning (and again now to make sure - > > nothing new was downloaded). The real CVS server, not the mirror. :-) > > > > mrproper and new lfssystem too. I've tried it 3 times so far with the > > same results, once on kernel 2.6, and twice on kernel 2.4. > > > > Maybe it's the combinations of selections (menuconfig) I have? > > I just verified it and I actually forgott to update the file config_pax > for the 2.4 kernel. > I updated it in CVS and it should work now. I just updated from CVS again, another make mrproper ..., and it does the same thing (2.4 kernel): # tail -n1 tmp/LOGS/build/prepare MAC system integration (none, direct, hook) [none] (NEW) |
|
From: Friedrich L. <fl...@fl...> - 2004-03-02 21:14:38
|
Oliver Jehle wrote on 02.03.2004 15:40 MET: > > i would rather suggest > > 2.4 = freeswan (until a maintained 2.6 ipsec backport is available) I think FreeSwan will still have the lead in the 2.4 arena. Anything backported will probably not be as stable. -- MfG / Regards Friedrich Lobenstock ____________________________________________________________________ Friedrich Lobenstock Linux Services Lobenstock URL: http://www.lsl.at/ Email: fl...@fl... ____________________________________________________________________ |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2004-03-02 20:54:12
|
>> > A fresh (mrproper) compile hangs during make prepare, asking: >> > >> > MAC system integration (none, direct, hook) [none] (NEW) >> >> I just ran one this night and it worked fine... >> >> The fix is actually in CVS, but that one is at least 1 week old. > > Nope, I updated from CVS this morning (and again now to make sure - > nothing new was downloaded). The real CVS server, not the mirror. :-) > > mrproper and new lfssystem too. I've tried it 3 times so far with the > same results, once on kernel 2.6, and twice on kernel 2.4. > > Maybe it's the combinations of selections (menuconfig) I have? I just verified it and I actually forgott to update the file config_pax for the 2.4 kernel. I updated it in CVS and it should work now. Sorry for that -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org |
|
From: Heiko Z. <he...@zu...> - 2004-03-02 20:54:12
|
>> > A fresh (mrproper) compile hangs during make prepare, asking: >> > >> > MAC system integration (none, direct, hook) [none] (NEW) >> >> I just ran one this night and it worked fine... >> >> The fix is actually in CVS, but that one is at least 1 week old. > > Nope, I updated from CVS this morning (and again now to make sure - > nothing new was downloaded). The real CVS server, not the mirror. :-) > > mrproper and new lfssystem too. I've tried it 3 times so far with the > same results, once on kernel 2.6, and twice on kernel 2.4. > > Maybe it's the combinations of selections (menuconfig) I have? I just verified it and I actually forgott to update the file config_pax for the 2.4 kernel. I updated it in CVS and it should work now. -- Regards Heiko Zuerker http://www.devil-linux.org |
35 messages has been excluded from this view by a project administrator.
