xfs
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: FAQ update

To: Eric Sandeen <sandeen@xxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: FAQ update
From: Harri Haataja <harri.haataja@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2001 12:02:50 +0200
Cc: xfs <linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx>
In-reply-to: <3BDCBBB8.D84B0E48@xxxxxxx>; from sandeen@xxxxxxx on Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 08:15:20PM -0600
References: <4.3.2.7.2.20011028155036.038993e0@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <4.3.2.7.2.20011028155036.038993e0@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <1004322591.839.12.camel@mdew> <4.3.2.7.2.20011028173346.0388b758@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> <20011028210611.A26342@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> <3BDCBBB8.D84B0E48@xxxxxxx>
Sender: owner-linux-xfs@xxxxxxxxxxx
User-agent: Mutt/1.2.5i
On Sun, Oct 28, 2001 at 08:15:20PM -0600, Eric Sandeen wrote:
> Harri Haataja wrote:
> 
> > I haven't seen either, but I did recenly get new kernel rpms (2.4.9)
> > from the testing dir in ftp. Now the 3d GL apps (for example gliv still
> > works) all seem to not work.
> > Is that an XF4.1 thing (something I heard, does RH7.2 have DRI?) or is
> > the driver (Ati Rage Fury) broken?
> 
> Not sure of the details, but the 2.4.9-6 and 2.4.9-7 RPMs differ only in
> the DRI config options - 2.4.9-6 is for RH7.1, 2.4.9-7 is for RH7.2. 
> Try grabbing the apropriate one and see if that helps...

I almost guessed that but abandoned the idea. I'll try that soon.

For some reason the more recent mkinitrd (using pivotroot) never seems
to work on older (let's say pre-7.2?) systems if upgrading from it but
with newer kernels such as this it does. Another odd end. I don't know
what's with it. It's a bit funny anyway because if your temp is mounted
nodev (call me paranoid now) (IIRC), it gives an error "all your
loopback devices are in use". I usually changed it to make the temps in
/boot/.

> > And to stay remotely on-topic, I don't think daily rpms are quite needed
> > unless you want to roll out CVS as rpms (for XFS part) but they stayed
> > in 2.4.5 for ages (or were well-hidden).
> 
> My thoughts on this are that any one who is going to use CVS snapshot
> code in their kernel should be enough of a "power user" to compile it
> themselves... I'm a bit wary of making it TOO easy for a novice to blow
> up their system with untested code.  :)

I'm not sure but can you easily check out the whole deal and rebuild it
as rpm? There are sides to having your software (incl. kernels, though
it's painful) managed.

-- 
I don't suffer from insanity; I enjoy every minute of it.
        -- Lieven Marchand


<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>