Redhat 8 or 9 modules ?

Redhat 8 or 9 modules ?

[Colin Harris]

Hi all,
           Can anyone out there shed some light please. A
colleague has high speed access to inet. He downloaded RH
8.0 with a copy on CD's for me. Apart from some screen
anomalies , RH 8.0 compiles with ax25 BUT it * will NOT
make_modules * and complains that file devlist.h is missing.
He has just downloaded RH 9.0 himself , which compiled , but
he says that HE now has the make_modules failure ( devlist.h
missing ). What IS going on ?
          Has anyone else ( with RH 8.0 or 9.0 ) had this
persistent failure to make modules and know's the answer ?
I did ask once before but the only reply I got was from an
8.0 user who said he didn't have devlist.h on his system
either but it made modules ok.

( Is Redhat going down the plug hole ? ).

- Regards Colin

Re: Redhat 8 or 9 modules ?

[Robert L Cochran]

The initial release of Red Hat 8.0 had a problem with glibc that might
be affecting you here. There have been several updated glibc releases
for recent Red Hat distributions including 8 and 9.

I strongly suggest first updating your Red Hat 8 or 9 system with all
the current bug fixes and updates before attempting to compile anything.
I definitely don't try compiling myself unless all the Red Hat bug fixes
are installed on my system. 

Also, if you use CPAN to fetch and compile Perl modules under Red Hat 9,
see Red Hat's Bugzilla bug #87682, and use the suggested workaround
mentioned in that for LANG before you do anything with CPAN. Be very
careful about messing with your LANG/locale settings though. I'd
probably change them back to what they were when I finish downloading
Perl modules off CPAN.

Thanks

Bob Cochran

Greenbelt, Maryland, USA

On Mon, 2003-04-21 at 03:00, Colin Harris wrote:
> Hi all,
>            Can anyone out there shed some light please. A
> colleague has high speed access to inet. He downloaded RH
> 8.0 with a copy on CD's for me. Apart from some screen
> anomalies , RH 8.0 compiles with ax25 BUT it * will NOT
> make_modules * and complains that file devlist.h is missing.
> He has just downloaded RH 9.0 himself , which compiled , but
> he says that HE now has the make_modules failure ( devlist.h
> missing ). What IS going on ?
>           Has anyone else ( with RH 8.0 or 9.0 ) had this
> persistent failure to make modules and know's the answer ?
> I did ask once before but the only reply I got was from an
> 8.0 user who said he didn't have devlist.h on his system
> either but it made modules ok.
> 
> ( Is Redhat going down the plug hole ? ).
> 
> - Regards Colin
> 
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-hams" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
-- 
Bob Cochran
Greenbelt, Maryland, USA
Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
See http://www.fsf.org/philosophy/no-word-attachments.html

Re: Redhat 8 or 9 modules ?

[terry]

On Mon, 21 Apr 2003, Colin Harris wrote:

> make_modules * and complains that file devlist.h is missing.

... the RH-8.0 boxed set used a 2.4.18-14 kernel. 'devlist.h' is nowhere
to be found on a pristine install.  however, the 2.4.20 kernel from
'http://www.kernel.org' does include that file in the 'drivers/pci/'
directory ...


-- 
73 , de WD0FPC		Pacific Nowthwest 2M Repeaters
    aka: terry 		http://www.aniota.com/~wd0fpc

Re: Redhat 8 or 9 modules ?

[terry]

On Mon, 21 Apr 2003, Robert L Cochran wrote:

> There have been several updated glibc releases for recent Red Hat
> distributions including 8 and 9.

... as i understand it, the latest spate of glibc issues involved an RPC
function within the 'desktop'.


> I definitely don't try compiling myself unless all the Red Hat bug fixes
> are installed on my system.

    there is a certain danger in that, even though, it's a healthy
mindset.  depending on RH to provide 'all your security' needs "traps" the
user.  more often than not, RH trails public disclosure of vulnerabilities
and fixes for them, by some time.  i am not willing to wait on RH to
'back-port' , and generate an RPM for it.
    as an aside, i built a new kernel, 2.4.20 using the the tools at hand
from a pristine RH-8.0 install.  also, that kernel has proven to be more
stable than RH's offering.

> see Red Hat's Bugzilla bug #87682, and use the suggested workaround
> mentioned in that for LANG before you do anything with CPAN. Be very
> careful about messing with your LANG/locale settings though. I'd
> probably change them back to what they were when I finish downloading
> Perl modules off CPAN.

    RH in its infinate wisdon chose to us (i think it's) UTF-8 as the
default LANG.  the RH-8 ncurses install puked because of it.  this , as i
understand it, was for 'internationalization'.  that's just dandy, only i
live in the US and really like being able to have more than 8 colors
available to my VC's.  for me, staying with RH's default encoding is not
an attractive option, but as has been mentioned, caution is warranted ...


-- 
73 , de WD0FPC		Pacific Nowthwest 2M Repeaters
    aka: terry 		http://www.aniota.com/~wd0fpc