I have tried emerging many applications with a 2.6 kernel symlink in place at /usr src. But about aproximately 60% of ebuilds are failing, claiming they cannot determine my kernel version, or that they cannot find a symlink in /usr/src pointing to my kernel version. I know it is early days with 2.6 kernels, however some quite important apps will not work when compiled with a 2.6 kernel symlink in place, they include (but are not exclusive to) Xfree86 4.3.0-r3 Xine, Wine, Mozilla 1.5 gxine, Mplayer, lirc and many others... In total as I have said, when compiling with a 2.6 kernel source symlink in place in /usr/src there is an overall 60% failure rate when building packages. Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1.install the latest 2.6 development-sources 2.create a symlink pointing to linux-2.4.0-testX 3.try to install any of the packages listed above, or indeed any large random list of packages. Actual Results: Won't compile. Expected Results: Should compile and install normally.
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
I'm resolving this as a duplicate of the linux-headers-2.6.0 bug; and as we have most packages more-or-less working on 2.6 headers I guess this can be shifted there as well. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 31285 ***
