From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S936415AbXGQUtY (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:49:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S936337AbXGQUp0 (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:45:26 -0400 Received: from 1wt.eu ([62.212.114.60]:3422 "EHLO 1wt.eu" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S936362AbXGQUpY (ORCPT ); Tue, 17 Jul 2007 16:45:24 -0400 Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 22:41:57 +0200 From: Willy Tarreau To: Tony Borras Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: Linux 2.4.35 tree abandoned/delayed? Message-ID: <20070717204155.GE943@1wt.eu> References: <8HJqo-2BV-23@gated-at.bofh.it> <8HJqo-2BV-21@gated-at.bofh.it> <8HNDE-JM-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <20070716232357.3d9e5ca7.tonyb@sysdev.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20070716232357.3d9e5ca7.tonyb@sysdev.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.11 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Hi Tony, [ first, please always keep people in CC on LKML since it's very easy to miss a thread ] On Mon, Jul 16, 2007 at 11:23:57PM -0800, Tony Borras wrote: > On Tue, 17 Jul 2007 07:20:06 +0200 > Willy Tarreau wrote: > > > could you please report what the problem was, in case it's not > > fixed yet ? > > Ok, reproduced error at ./net/ipv4/fib_semantics.c > line 436 changed label: > errout -> err_inval I don't know where you downloaded 2.4.35-pre5 from, but I've checked the sources and could not find any reference to "errout" here in any version! Or what is possible is that your 2.4.34 kernel got corrupted on your disk after applying any patch. Sometimes, some shell scripts providede with some drivers directly tamper with the sources. You should check that your tree is valid by downloading another one and comparing them. It had already happened to me in the past and I got 3 or 4 private kernels with a fix that I did not know I had applied. Fortunately, this does not happen anymore with git ;-) > then it builds fine! > > started with linux-2.4.34 > then patched > patch-2.4.34.1 > patch-2.4.34.2 > patch-2.4.34.3 > patch-2.4.34.4 > patch-2.4.34.5 > patch-2.4.35.pre5 Huh !!! You should not apply all 2.4.34 patches before 2.4.35. You should see the development process like this : ---> 2.4.34 ----> 2.4.35-pre1 ----> 2.4.35-pre2 ---> ... ---> 2.4.35 \ `--> 2.4.34.1 --> 2.4.34.2 --> 2.4.34.3 ... So 2.4.35-preX and 2.4.34.X are two different branches forked from 2.4.34. All 2.4.35-preX patches are made for 2.4.34, and all 2.4.34.X patches are made for 2.4.34 too. You should see 2.4.34 as the real official kernel, and other ones as convenience versions released in order to help people keep up to date without having to use possibly buggy pre-releases, even if they are quite close. > I used a make oldconfig on a .config that builds in 2.4.34 > > Hope that helps > TonyB Thanks anyway for your feedback ! Regards, Willy