Linux v2.4.19

Linux v2.4.19

[Marcelo Tosatti]

final:

- 2.4.19-rc5 was released as 2.4.19 with no changes.


Summary of changes from v2.4.19-rc4 to v2.4.19-rc5
============================================

<davem@redhat.com> (02/08/01 1.662)
	[PATCH] Correct openprom fix

	   <davem@redhat.com> (02/07/31 1.661)
	   	[PATCH] Add missing check to openprom driver

<akpm@zip.com.au> (02/08/01 1.663)
	[PATCH] disable READA

<marcelo@plucky.distro.conectiva> (02/08/01 1.664)
	Change EXTRAVERSION to -rc5

Re: Linux v2.4.19

[Harald Dunkel]

Hi folks,

I've got billions of undefined symbols during 'make modules_install'.

:
cd /lib/modules/2.4.19; \
mkdir -p pcmcia; \
find kernel -path '*/pcmcia/*' -name '*.o' | xargs -i -r ln -sf ../{} pcmcia
if [ -r System.map ]; then /sbin/depmod -ae -F System.map  2.4.19; fi
depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in /lib/modules/2.4.19/kernel/drivers/cdrom/cdrom.o
depmod:         register_sysctl_table_Rab92f33e
depmod:         kmalloc_R93d4cfe6
depmod:         __generic_copy_to_user_Rd523fdd3
depmod:         __generic_copy_from_user_R116166aa
:

Is this due to gcc 2.95.4? Can anybody reproduce this? I'm
running Debian (Sid, i386).


Regards

Harri

Re: Linux v2.4.19

[Harald Dunkel]

PS: After booting 2.4.19 'depmod -a' works as expected, but
     'depmod -ae -F /boot/System.map-2.4.19 2.4.19' doesn't. I
     would guess its a problem with depmod.


Regards

Harri

Re: Linux v2.4.19

[Thunder from the hill]

Hi,

On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> PS: After booting 2.4.19 'depmod -a' works as expected, but
>      'depmod -ae -F /boot/System.map-2.4.19 2.4.19' doesn't. I
>      would guess its a problem with depmod.

I'd rather guess the problem is that you didn't make dep after config 
changes. Read the FAQ, please.

			Thunder
-- 
.-../../-./..-/-..- .-./..-/.-.././.../.-.-.-

Re: Linux v2.4.19

[Harald Dunkel]

Hi T.

Thunder from the hill wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> 
>>PS: After booting 2.4.19 'depmod -a' works as expected, but
>>     'depmod -ae -F /boot/System.map-2.4.19 2.4.19' doesn't. I
>>     would guess its a problem with depmod.
> 
> 
> I'd rather guess the problem is that you didn't make dep after config 
> changes. Read the FAQ, please.

Of course 'make dep' was in. But Debian includes modutils 2.4.15. After
upgrading to 2.4.19 the problem is gone. Debian is out of date :-(.

Maybe it would help to update Documentation/Changes to list the new
modutils, too?


Regards

Harri

Re: Linux v2.4.19

[Tom Rini]

On Sat, Aug 03, 2002 at 02:40:58PM +0200, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> Hi T.
> 
> Thunder from the hill wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Harald Dunkel wrote:
> >
> >>PS: After booting 2.4.19 'depmod -a' works as expected, but
> >>    'depmod -ae -F /boot/System.map-2.4.19 2.4.19' doesn't. I
> >>    would guess its a problem with depmod.
> >
> >
> >I'd rather guess the problem is that you didn't make dep after config 
> >changes. Read the FAQ, please.
> 
> Of course 'make dep' was in. But Debian includes modutils 2.4.15. After
> upgrading to 2.4.19 the problem is gone. Debian is out of date :-(.
> 
> Maybe it would help to update Documentation/Changes to list the new
> modutils, too?

Are you sure you didn't just get bit by a binutils bug?  Newer modutils
are required by newer binutils, but older binutils certainly work.  Is
this Debian/unstable or Debian/stable?

-- 
Tom Rini (TR1265)
http://gate.crashing.org/~trini/

Re: Linux v2.4.19

[Mr. James W. Laferriere]

	Hello Marcelo ,  Ummmm .  Haven't the tarballs usuaully been
	archived as 'linux/' instead of 'linux-2.4.19/' ?

	I am also finding atm driver files touched but no obvious entries
	in the ChangeLog .  ie: linux-2.4.19/drivers/atm/fore200e.c
	touched '2002-08-02 20:39' by tar archive time stamp .

	The below are the only entries in the ChangeLog file that directly
	mention ATM .  ??? ,  Tia,  JimL

23965-<rusty@rustcorp.com.au> (02/06/03 1.461)
24006:  [PATCH] Trivial 2.4.19-pre9: check_region in drivers/atm/horizon.c
24074-
--
38191-<ldb@ldb.ods.org> (02/05/20 1.445.2.7)
38230:  [PATCH] Fix PPPoATM crash on disconnection
38274-
--
56257-<maxk@qualcomm.com> (02/04/29 1.383.2.89)
56299:  Add support for ATM Ethernet bridging (RFC 2684)
56349-

JimL

On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, Marcelo Tosatti wrote:
> final:
> - 2.4.19-rc5 was released as 2.4.19 with no changes.

> Summary of changes from v2.4.19-rc4 to v2.4.19-rc5
> ============================================
> <davem@redhat.com> (02/08/01 1.662)
> 	[PATCH] Correct openprom fix
> 	   <davem@redhat.com> (02/07/31 1.661)
> 	   	[PATCH] Add missing check to openprom driver
> <akpm@zip.com.au> (02/08/01 1.663)
> 	[PATCH] disable READA
> <marcelo@plucky.distro.conectiva> (02/08/01 1.664)
> 	Change EXTRAVERSION to -rc5

       +------------------------------------------------------------------+
       | James   W.   Laferriere | System    Techniques | Give me VMS     |
       | Network        Engineer |     P.O. Box 854     |  Give me Linux  |
       | babydr@baby-dragons.com | Coudersport PA 16915 |   only  on  AXP |
       +------------------------------------------------------------------+

Re: Linux v2.4.19

[Ged Haywood]

Hi there,

On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:

> Haven't the tarballs usuaully been archived as 'linux/' instead of
> 'linux-2.4.19/' ?

Absolutely not.  Many systems have a symlink 'linux' to the current
kernel tree, which is a directory e.g. 'linux-2.2.16'.  If the tarball
extracts into the 'linux' directory it would overwrite the (presumed
working) source.  I'm sure that the use of 'linux' was an oversight.
At least I hope it was.


73,
Ged.

Re: Linux v2.4.19

[Alan Cox]

On Sat, 2002-08-03 at 22:00, Ged Haywood wrote:
> Hi there,
> 
> On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:
> 
> > Haven't the tarballs usuaully been archived as 'linux/' instead of
> > 'linux-2.4.19/' ?
> 
> Absolutely not.  Many systems have a symlink 'linux' to the current
> kernel tree, which is a directory e.g. 'linux-2.2.16'.  If the tarball

Kernels until recently did always unpack into linux/. Linus changed and
I'm happy Marcelo has followed suit, its much more sensible the new way

Re: Linux v2.4.19

[bill davidsen]

In article <1028413405.1761.38.camel@irongate.swansea.linux.org.uk>,
Alan Cox  <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk> wrote:
| On Sat, 2002-08-03 at 22:00, Ged Haywood wrote:
| > Hi there,
| > 
| > On Sat, 3 Aug 2002, Mr. James W. Laferriere wrote:
| > 
| > > Haven't the tarballs usuaully been archived as 'linux/' instead of
| > > 'linux-2.4.19/' ?
| > 
| > Absolutely not.  Many systems have a symlink 'linux' to the current
| > kernel tree, which is a directory e.g. 'linux-2.2.16'.  If the tarball
| 
| Kernels until recently did always unpack into linux/. Linus changed and
| I'm happy Marcelo has followed suit, its much more sensible the new way

Let's hope the major fix trees like -aa and -ac follow the convention. I
have no problem with the change (since I keep my stuff that way) but I
hope it is pervasive.
-- 
bill davidsen <davidsen@tmr.com>
  CTO, TMR Associates, Inc
Doing interesting things with little computers since 1979.