Kernel 2.4.18-18 Compile Problems..

[Christopher Wagner]

<comments below>

-----Original Message-----
From: ME [mailto:dugan at passwall.com]
Sent: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 12:52 PM
To: talk at nblug.org
Subject: RE: Kernel 2.4.18-18 Compile Problems..


> I am in the middle of studying for finals right now, but can try to offer
> more suggestions for a bit..

I understand, answer what you have time for, school is more important than
getting my silly Linux box to compile it's kernel.  I can wait. :)

> An odd question, but I'll ask anyway... When you did the make menuconfig,
> did you leave anything as a module? If everything is part of a static
> kernel, and you dont have any module-ized drivers, then make modules will
> fail (since it does not have any modules to make.) This does not look like
> the output from when you try to make modules without any drivers set as
> modules, but I want to ask anyway as I have not seen that output since 2.0
> kernels or maybe 2.2...

I still have options configured for modules.  I make attempt to make a
kernel which is fully static.

> (There is little -functionally- bad about not using modules. A kernel
> without modules can often work as well as a kernel with modules. There are
> plusses and minuses to this issue/decision. I make all of my drivers that
> are connected to my box static in their inclusion to my kernel. Any
> peripherals that can be hot-swapped I make into modules. The only thing
> that I almost always make into a module is "appletalk". There are very
> good plusses to making everything that can be a module, a module.)

This is a pretty static box, I don't do much hot-swapping.  I have my USB
removable storage stuff set-up as modules (used very infrequently), my NIC
is a module, a lot of my FS support is modules, appletalk, etc..  Appletalk,
I've found, is an excellent example of a good reason to use modules.

> Another question, have you considered upgrading your gcc if and update is
> available? Also, you may want to examine installation of the kernel
> headers for the kernel you are using, if you are using a packaged kernel.
> (The path I see with "linux-2.4.18-18.7.x" looks a lot like a redhat
> kernel source tree name. Most of the kernels I get from kernel.org extract
> to just use the name "linux" or "linux-2.4.20" or the like, but no extra
> digits like "-18.7.x".

Yes, I'm running Redhat 7.3, I downloaded the kernel source from Redhat's
site in RPM form.

I've verified gcc, glibc, glibc-kernheaders, et al. are all installed
properly and up to date.  I still can't get the silly thing to compile the
modules. :(

- Christopher Wagner
chrisw at pacaids.com
Packaging Aids Corporation - Information Systems
P.O. Box 9144
San Rafael, CA 94912-9144
http://www.pacaids.com/
(415) 454-4868 x116