.
.
>If you're planning on upgrading a box that is running 1.2.13 to
>2.2.x, and only by replacing the kernel, you'll quickly find that
>you're trying to do something that will result in a lot of wasted
>man hours fiddling around.
I think you're painting this as too much of the apocolypse; 2.2 (and
2.3) breaks compatability with 2.0 more than 2.0 broke compatability
with 1.2, but many of the broken things can be patched around, if
you're willing to never go back to 1.2.13
I've found that I needed to (a) either use devfs to get around the
arbitary twidding of major numbers or run MAKEDEV to get the new
major numbers, (b) do a tiny patch to the kernel to put back the old
locking ioctls with libc4 uses, (c) do something with dhcpcd, if you
use it, because the tcp stack was broken in 2.1 and old dhcpcd's
stopped working, and (d) make certain that you're running a recent
set of binutils (2.8 or better), a recent gcc (2.7.2.*), a new set of
the ldso tools (1.9.9 seem to work for me).
If you build all this stuff from scratch, it will take about a
day, and when you're done you should have your systems in a
state where 2.2 and 2.3 will work.
Should, I say, because I've backed down to 2.0.28+logo because
it's too damn hard to find a way to shoehorn that additional
110k of kernel size onto an install floppy.
____
david parsons \bi/ I should put Unix98 pty's into libc4 before the
\/ next upgrade attempt.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/