[lkml]   [1997]   [Feb]   [10]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Version bug in 2.0.29?

    Well, need fear not, for I talked to a man named Trevor about it, and he
    says that make oldconfig INDEED has a bug, the "make oldconfig" doesn't
    correctly update the version.h file, but he says "make menuconfig" does do
    this correctly. So I beg of forgiveness for bothering you with this

    On Sat, 8 Feb 1997, W. Reilly Cooley wrote:

    > # I installed 2.0.29 last night.. apon returning to the machine this morning
    > # and rebooting, I found it to still be 2.0.28. I remember doing everything
    > # right, unzipping it, checking all symlinks, everything. I decided to
    > # check the version.h in /usr/src/linux/include/linux, and it still said it
    > # was 2.0.28.... This startled me incredibly, and I was wondering if its a
    > # bug in the kernel, or was it just something I've done?
    > I'm not much of an authority, but I don't think you should send this
    > sort of thing to Linus.
    > I don't know if this really counts as a 'bug'. Make the appropriate
    > change, diff it, and post the patch. (Or, if you think you may be
    > mistaken, d/l the patch to 2.0.29 and check it.)
    > Wil
    > -------------------------------------------------------------
    > W. Reilly Cooley
    > The Naked Ape Consulting
    > 1509 NE 10th Ave., #104 Portland, OR 97232
    > 503 287-2165
    > As a service, I provide analysis for viruses and poor grammar to senders
    > of unsolicited commercial e-mail at a rate of US$250 per hour. Delivery of
    > said correspondence constitutes a request for the afforementioned services
    > at said price.

     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:38    [W:0.019 / U:13.728 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site