| 1 |
On Tuesday 21 October 2003 3:25, Spider wrote: |
| 2 |
> begin quote |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Then fix pcmcia-cs and alsa-driver before you suggest anything. as it |
| 5 |
> is, my machine won't boot properly without pcmcia-cs -and- alsa, as they |
| 6 |
> IRQ conflict unless loaded in a certain order. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Excuse me? "I" should fix these? |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> They are both dependant on the target module, and theres no way in a |
| 11 |
> gnomes purple hell you are going to get me into a state where I can |
| 12 |
> reboot first, and then rebuild the modules, only to reboot again so I |
| 13 |
> have a working boot session. uh-oh- NO. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
Under those conditions likely not..... |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> And no, you won't get me to emerge it with SLOT="purple-gnomes-2.4.44" |
| 18 |
> either, Just because I sat down and got my own kerneltree installed into |
| 19 |
> usr/src/testkernelwithextraJFSpatches , and then loose my existing , |
| 20 |
> working, tried kernelset. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Okay, this part comes across barely intelligible, but if it helps substitute |
| 23 |
TARGET= for SLOT=.. of course I did point out it was a suggestion, not a |
| 24 |
solution, and you have offered up what counterproposal? |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> When you get this set to -automagically- detect the target kernel., |
| 27 |
> build modules and fix. then ok. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Again with the when "i" thing... |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> if you want it to depend on the running kernel, erm... No. theres a few |
| 32 |
> things already that do so, and that is -BROKEN- behaviour. I don't even |
| 33 |
> -HAVE- the sources for my running kernel at most times. What? No I |
| 34 |
> don't need them. I shouldn't need to have my sources for the hard |
| 35 |
> compiled and working copy of 2.4.18-saviour with extra everything that I |
| 36 |
> know boots all my machines and I have in a .tar stored away for working |
| 37 |
> order. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
"I" don't want to have it depend on a running kernel, or on a symlink, All I |
| 40 |
was saying is that in most cases it'd probably be just easier to boot into a |
| 41 |
running kernel and build your non-essential mod package, I realize that this |
| 42 |
is not always the case. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
> Yes, this thread invoked a lot of hot emotions from my side. |
| 45 |
> |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
> // Spider |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
Well, guess what? I was pretty pissed off _before_ I saw your mail, so you |
| 50 |
can imagine where I'm at now, especially since I've asked a couple of times |
| 51 |
why this symlink is necessary, when it's highly discouraged. If a package |
| 52 |
needs this symlink, mask it, get it fixed upstream or dont carry it at all |
| 53 |
ffs. I point out the bad ones when I see them, and I atleast proffered a |
| 54 |
suggestion. I was civil when this was a discussion, but turning this into a |
| 55 |
pissing match was sheer stupidity. But I guess I'm just the stupid end user |
| 56 |
with no say, I guess? Atleast when I'm being a prick, I only represent me. |
| 57 |
|
| 58 |
-- |
| 59 |
Chuck Brewer |
| 60 |
Registered Linux User #284015 |
| 61 |
Get my gpg public key at pgp.mit.edu!! Encrypted e-mail preferred. |
Archives