| 1 |
Mark Knecht wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, Feb 1, 2009 at 1:32 PM, KH <gentoo-user@××××××××××××××××.de> wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> Volker Armin Hemmann schrieb: |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>>> On Sonntag 01 Februar 2009, Dale wrote: |
| 7 |
>>> |
| 8 |
>>> |
| 9 |
>>>> Hi, |
| 10 |
>>>> |
| 11 |
>>>> I just rebuilt a newer kernel and noticed something. It seems bzImage |
| 12 |
>>>> has moved from arch/i386/boot/bzImage to arch/x86/boot/bzImage. When |
| 13 |
>>>> did this happen? Is x86 the same as i386? |
| 14 |
>>>> |
| 15 |
>>>> |
| 16 |
>>> yes. They merged the '386' and the amd64/x86_64 architecture into x86. |
| 17 |
>>> |
| 18 |
>>> And it happend a couple of kernel versions ago. |
| 19 |
>>> |
| 20 |
>>> |
| 21 |
>> I am running amd64 using 2.6.27-gentoo-r8 and in arch there still is x86 |
| 22 |
>> an x86_64. Am I doing anything wrong or did I just missanderstand you? |
| 23 |
>> |
| 24 |
>> kh |
| 25 |
>> |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> cd in there and look around. x86_64 only has a boot directory and when |
| 28 |
> you look at the bzImage file in it you find it's a link to |
| 29 |
> ../../x86/boot/bzImage so what's happening is all the files are under |
| 30 |
> x86 but if you say 'I built AMD64' and do cp arch/x86_64/boot/bzImage |
| 31 |
> you are really getting the file under x86. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> Hope this helps, |
| 34 |
> Mark |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
Well, when I tried to copy the old way, it just copied the link itself, |
| 40 |
then when I looked in /boot, it was red and really upset. I had to copy |
| 41 |
the kernel with Konqeror to get it into /boot, after finding the stupid |
| 42 |
thing. Don't get mad at me, every time I copied it it was a broken |
| 43 |
link. Sometimes you got to do what you got to do. :/ |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Dale |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
:-) :-) |
Archives