sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Discussion of Spells and Grimoire items
List archive
Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells
- From: Hamish Greig <hgreig AT bigpond.net.au>
- To: sm-grimoire AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells
- Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 14:05:02 +1100
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Wed, 26 Nov 2003 13:38, Robin Cook wrote:
> I have been running on the 2.6 kernels for a while now and my glibc is
> compiled against the 2.6 kernel. So far there is no fix for this as I
> have gone round and round with developers of several spells and always
> comes down to you should be using the 2.4 headers. So I guess until the
> 2.6 kernel header become the standard and the programs get updated to
> use them I'll just keep doing what I have been. As mentioned earlier is
> I keep a 2.4 kernel around to change the /usr/src/linux link whenever I
> encounter a spell that doesn't compile against the 2.6 kernels.
>
> CuZnDragon
> Robin Cook
it is a smaller percentage that fails to compile with 2.6 ? most are ok ?
perhaps the easiest thing is to copy all thes dirs/files then run a script
when needed that uses mount --bind to *hide* the 2.6 files with ones from
the /usr/src/linux-2.4.XX tree ?
would that be acceptable ?
so the glibc query would default to yes, (please copy configured kernel
headers to /usr/include) maybe after a successful cast, then you need only
run mount --bind a few times when needed, or is the /lib/modules/$uname
- -r/build link also a problem ?
Hamish
- --
IRC nick: drmoriarty
SMGL co-conspirator
# Do You SMGL!?
# http://www.sourcemage.org/
# Linux so advanced it may as well be magic!
ANTI-SPAM WARNING: I delete any html message from my server without reading
Please use text only
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/xBhu8fSufZR6424RAvr/AJ9yOnmekohjdbtwGrdWxNSnJc9x/wCfbBG2
LFjWEqkIIwIY7a+EHf6a+p0=
=nZCp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells
, (continued)
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells,
Arwed von Merkatz, 11/25/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells, Eric Sandall, 11/25/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells,
Arwed von Merkatz, 11/25/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells,
Hamish Greig, 11/25/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells, Arwed von Merkatz, 11/25/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells,
Eric Sandall, 11/25/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells, Hamish Greig, 11/25/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells, Eric Sandall, 11/25/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells, Hamish Greig, 11/25/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells,
Hamish Greig, 11/25/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells,
Robin Cook, 11/25/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells, Hamish Greig, 11/25/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells, Arwed von Merkatz, 11/26/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells, Arwed von Merkatz, 11/26/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells, Arwed von Merkatz, 11/26/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells, Hamish Greig, 11/26/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells, Eric Sandall, 11/26/2003
-
Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells,
Arwed von Merkatz, 11/25/2003
- Re: [SM-Grimoire] 2.6.0-test10 sorcery rebuild -> 51 failed spells, Robin Cook, 11/27/2003
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.