Summary: | Ebuilds will not compile with a 2.6 kernel symlink in place | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Q <raid517> |
Component: | New packages | Assignee: | x86-kernel (DEPRECATED) <x86-kernel> |
Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | ||
Severity: | normal | CC: | aalmenar, mholzer |
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | x86 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
Bug Depends on: | 22223, 30541, 31176, 31250, 31285, 31286, 31419, 31420 | ||
Bug Blocks: |
Description
Q
2003-10-21 11:58:46 UTC
this is a meta-bug see other bugs for details Well I sure hope somebody figures something out soon, my Xserver is currently as stable as a glue sniffing nun on roller skates. I think this has a lot to do with the fact that Xfree explicityly states it must be recompiled against 2.6 kernel headers when using a 2.6 kernel. The fact that it is not possible to recompile xfree with the 2.6 kernel headers in place has not it seems been taken into account. I don't think anybody can claim Gentoo is 2.6 ready yet. It seems 2.6 kernels pretty much break portage. Q Officially, we don't support 2.6 kernels. The ebuilds are in portage as a convenience. That being said I think the more help we have to get all packages to work with 2.6, the sooner we will offically support 2.6 kernels. Well I am aware of the official position. But surely this should be qualified with a 'we don't officially support it yet'? 2.6 is just around the corner, and it would certainly be foolhardy to ignore it. (Not that I'm saying this is what the devs are doing). Gentoo users are on the whole an adventurous bunch, otherwise I doubt they would have picked such a challenging distribution. So I would expect many en' mass to adopt the 2.6 kernel version as soon as the anouncement of a stable release is made. Perhaps in the meantime you could consider those currently using 2.6x kernmels as beta testers who can provide valuable data to aid Gentoo development? Overall I think placing some concerted focus on the 2.6 kernel branch can only have a postitive out come, both in the near and in the longer term. Q Most problems should now be fixed in linux-headers-2.6.0. Try those and file a bug if you get any problems. Just for reference, I haven't had any problems with XFree86 4.3.99.14; in fact, most of my system was built against 2.4 just a couple of months ago, yet my 2.6.1 kernel, with the latest 2.6 headers and rebuilt glibc, runs just great. I had a little build trouble with the 2.6.1 kernel segfaulting, but rebuilding gcc and binutils, plus dropping the memory speed in the BIOS to Auto, and now I'm stable again. I've only built around 20 packages so far, mostly non-GUI apps, but no major failures yet. I personally would like to see as much testing of 2.6.x as possible, as it seems to solve many hardware and stability issues for me. So far, I've arrived at the following setup: 2.6.1 kernel latest headers latest module-init-tools /usr/src/linux symlink to 2.6.1 rebuilt glibc, gcc, binutils mounting sysfs, devpts, and devfs at boot (my first attempts at udev failed) The above XFree works great, but most of my system is just x86 (Gnome 2.4.x blah blah) with specific packages ~x86 for various reasons). ACPI works great, and lots of other stuff (except suspend on the lappy). HTH, Steve |