New 2.6.0-test1 kernel - problem compiling in RH9 , OK in ..

SRIKANTH NS wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I am running triple boot (Win98/RH9/Slac9) PC. I thought of compiling a
> kernel by myself (shivered really, since I am a relative newbie at these
> things though using linux for 2 years)
>
> In slack9 , xconfig , make , make modules and make bzImage went ok and I
> could boot with new kernel, though there were some mistakes committed by
> me due to which am unable to mount win partitions and sound is till
> croaking. But in RH9.0 , after xconfig, during make, it compiled up to
> filesystems and during drivers phase it failed with error message
>
> "drivers/char/riscom8.o" -error2
> It did not procedd after this. I wonder what could be wrong? Why it
> compiled in Slack9 and not in RH?
>
> PC is Celeron 900MHz, 128 MB RAM, i815 MOBO with integratred video/sound.
>
> Srikanth

Be ready to be flamed to hell.

You have committed an biblical sin here.

This is an elitist group here. They would love to give you hell since you
asked a question about RdHat. That is a booboo a no no.

Look at what I recieved in response to my question (a couple threads below)
about Tiny Linux which is based on Slackware 4.0 yesterday.

You would likely recieve a lot of RTFM and such.

In article <bhj2n3$3tkv$1@ID-176311.news.uni-berlin.de>, SRIKANTH NS wrote:

> It did not procedd after this. I wonder what could be wrong? Why it compiled
> in Slack9 and not in RH?

The kernel sources distributed with Slackware are unmodified sources right
from kernel.org and should always compile, unless Torvalds released a bad
kernel source. Red Hat modifies their kernels so additional things might
be needed to get a compile to work. Since the Slackware source compiled
but the Red Hat source didn't, you might get better answers from a Red Hat
news group or mailing list. My answer is "I don't know."

[followup-to set]
In article <bhj2n3$3tkv$1@ID-176311.news.uni-berlin.de>,
SRIKANTH NS wrote:
> during drivers phase it failed with error message
>
> "drivers/char/riscom8.o" -error2

Read more of the stderr output and you might see more of the reason for
the failure.

> It did not procedd after this. I wonder what could be wrong? Why it compiled
> in Slack9 and not in RH?

The inappropriate forum issue has already been brought up by other
posters and trolls. a.o.l.s. can't help you with Red Hat problems.

Is there any reason why you need 2 copies? The same kernel image can be
used to boot any number of root filesystems, regardless of the distro
installed thereupon. You would of course need to install the modules in
each, and to configure the boot loader appropriately.
--
/dev/rob0 - preferred_email=i$((28*28+2)@softhome.net
or put "not-spam" or "/dev/rob0" in Subject header to reply

On Fri, 15 Aug 2003 22:08:58 +0530, SRIKANTH NS wrote:

> But in RH9.0 , after xconfig, during make, it compiled up to filesystems and
> during drivers phase it failed with error message
>
> "drivers/char/riscom8.o" -error2

I built and booted the 2.6 kernel on RH9 a few weeks ago. I ran
make oldconfig first, rather than make xconfig as you did. This
gave me a bootable kernel. At that point you have a workable
config that you can tweak.

hth

Bartosz Oudekerk wrote:

> Since it works in slack, it's not a Slackware problem. Take it to RH
> group.
>

You idiot. What he is asking is that what is the difference between RH &
Slackware that makes his thing in work in Slackware but not RH.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

/dev/rob0 <rob0.TakeThisOut@gmx.co.uk> is thought to have typed
the following text on Fri, 15 Aug 2003 at 19:54 GMT:

> Is there any reason why you need 2 copies? The same kernel image can be
> used to boot any number of root filesystems, regardless of the distro
> installed thereupon. You would of course need to install the modules in
> each, and to configure the boot loader appropriately.

if you can have a /boot partition that's shared, why couldn't you have
a /lib/modules partition that's shared? I don't know of any other libs
that are installed there.

- --
Bartosz Oudekerk

Play Rogue, visit exotic locations, meet strange creatures
and kill them.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/PUtI256ZyNYAOpkRAkt/AJ905QxUJpUd2AoA/bVmxBCrn/N1NQCffsSH
d7xIE2faoL5z8IonO2AwX48=
=bqVH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In alt.os.linux.slackware Bartosz Oudekerk <tyranas RemoveThis @lappie.bartosz.xs4all.nl> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Followup-To set to AOLS
>
> SRIKANTH NS <nssrikanth RemoveThis @hotmail.com> is thought to have typed
> the following text on Fri, 15 Aug 2003 at 16:38 GMT:
>
>> "drivers/char/riscom8.o" -error2
>> It did not procedd after this. I wonder what could be wrong? Why it compiled
>> in Slack9 and not in RH?

> Since it works in slack, it's not a Slackware problem. Take it to RH
> group.

Why don't _you_ take it to RH? Or at least a moderated group where
you can direct which postings are included?

cordially, as always,

rm

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article <069%a.15886$BC2.7663@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>, AverageJoe wrote:
> Bartosz Oudekerk wrote:
>
>> Since it works in slack, it's not a Slackware problem. Take it to RH
>> group.
>>
>
> You idiot. What he is asking is that what is the difference between RH &
> Slackware that makes his thing in work in Slackware but not RH.

That sure helped a lot.....

If you're so smart.... why don't you answer it. The only thing _I_ know
about RH is to avoid it.
- --
For some reason, this fortune reminds everyone of Marvin Zelkowitz.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/PSP+qV1uRRMUN/wRArm8AJ4+bJb9E3SMwDP1tIcHusdK/wDg2ACdENL1
Ou85M3wvN78rssNwJXOe2yA=
=RlG4
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article <069%a.15886$BC2.7663@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
AverageJoe wrote:
> Bartosz Oudekerk wrote:
>
>> Since it works in slack, it's not a Slackware problem. Take it to RH
>> group.
>
> You idiot. What he is asking is that what is the difference between RH &
> Slackware that makes his thing in work in Slackware but not RH.

And just how would we know? I don't know how RH has bastardized their
libs/compiler/etc, do you? The OP will get *better* help in a RH
group--Bartosz's answer has nothing to do with elitism or whatever,
just pragmatism.

And if you think his response to the OP was a flame, you haven't read
carefully the responses to all of your very polite (dare I say, "cordial")
posts.

- --keith

- --
kkeller-mmmspam.RemoveThis@wombat.san-francisco.ca.us
(try just my userid to email me)
AOLSFAQ=http://wombat.san-francisco.ca.us/cgi-bin/fom

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAj89UScACgkQhVcNCxZ5ID9N1gCfdHGLQhnPTYorG6EjS7kgjtkV
yPIAnidMvpunKRNEhEJnK52YN3c6GYuP
=Fx/a
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

In article <slrnbjqiq6.6ua.tyranas RemoveThis @Lappie.bartosz.xs4all.nl>,
Bartosz Oudekerk wrote:
> if you can have a /boot partition that's shared, why couldn't you have
> a /lib/modules partition that's shared? I don't know of any other libs

Obviously you can't share a /lib because there are libraries which are
needed at boot (before other filesystems are mounted.) Hmmm, I don't
know. That might work. Or, one /lib/modules could be a symlink to the
/other_OS/lib/modules. /other_OS would have to mount, of course.

If you want to try this (hey I would, but I don't have any multi-Linux
systems now you might want to make BOTH /lib/modules directories a
symlink to /boot/modules (assuming a shared /boot, of course, and you
might want to make the /boot a bit larger than if were only being used
for kernels.)

You don't need to be running a multi-Linux box to try this, on further
thought. It could be tested with a /lib/modules symlink to any other
filesystem other than the root.
--
/dev/rob0 - preferred_email=i$((28*28+2)@softhome.net
or put "not-spam" or "/dev/rob0" in Subject header to reply

Bilbo wrote:

> That sure helped a lot.....
>
> If you're so smart.... why don't you answer it. The only thing _I_ know
> about RH is to avoid it.
> - --

I was not trying to help him. I was trying to make a point about how the
regulars in this NewsGroup treat newcomers, newbies.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Bilbo <bilbono RemoveThis @spamnedlinux.nl> is thought to have typed
the following text on Fri, 15 Aug 2003 at 18:18 GMT:

> In article <069%a.15886$BC2.7663@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net>, AverageJoe wrote:

>> Bartosz Oudekerk wrote:
>>
Since AverageJoe is so desperatly looking for answers, could somebody
please give him the answer to the following question?

What does *PLONK* mean?

- --
Bartosz Oudekerk

Play Rogue, visit exotic locations, meet strange creatures
and kill them.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/PVJd256ZyNYAOpkRAmJ0AJ9ZDJrvaHi9tzhrKLPNQMQfAFDWegCgo87d
0d5+TinHSaZECjAHmaLfRjc=
=Hs+A
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Keith Keller <kkeller-spammmm DeleteThis @wombat.san-francisco.ca.us> trolled:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1

pgp trash troll delete

> AverageJoe wrote:
>> Bartosz The Hemmorhoid wrote:

>>> Since it works in slack, it's not a Slackware problem. Take it
>>> to RH group.

>> You idiot. What he is asking is that what is the difference
>> between RH & Slackware that makes his thing in work in Slackware
>> but not RH.

> And just how would we know? I don't know how RH has bastardized their
> libs/compiler/etc, do you?

How do you know that RH has bastardized their libs? If that's the
answer to his question then simply say so or shut up about it.

Why the game?

cordially, as always,

rm