2.6.35.10-74 compilation (and build) problems

[Jarod Wilson]

On Jan 5, 2011, at 1:45 PM, Mr Dash Four wrote:

> What I did initially is copy my .34.x .config file and after that I ran 
> "make oldconfig", assuming that for any new/missing options that there 
> are (i.e. the difference between the .34 and the new .35 version of the 
> kernel) I will be asked for. That is, what I thought, the sole reason of 
> running the oldconfig target.
> 
> Having *just* done diff comparison between the 'stock' .config and my 
> .config (the one I attached here) - which I thought *should* amalgamate 
> all the options between the 2 versions available (i.e. the result of 
> running make oldconfig) - I discovered that quite a few of the options 
> present in my .config are not there!
> 
> The omission of a crucial group, which in my opinion produces the error 
> I described in my original post, is this:
> 
> CONFIG_DRM_VMWGFX
> CONFIG_DRM_NOVEAU**
> CONFIG_DRM_NOVEAU_BACKLIGHT
> CONFIG_DRM_NOVEAU_DEBUG
> 
> The above produces, among other things, noveau.ko (marked with '**' 
> above), which is the driver used for my display here. Having also 
> scanned the stock-produced initramfs and the initramfs file generated 
> after I install the kernel, I can confirm that drivers/noveau/noveau.ko 
> is NOT there (in my 'custom-build/generated' initramfs file), so the 
> source of my not-so-good experiences with the .35 kernel, I think, has 
> been established.
> 
> The question is - have I did something wrong by 1) copying an 'old'
> (.34) .config; 2) running make oldconfig; and 3) make menuconfig, 
> thinking that the oldconfig target will take care of the options which 
> are missing in the 'old' version of the .config file and ask me to fill 
> in the gaps (i.e. asking all those questions)?

Running make oldconfig is fine, provided you actually know the right
answers to get a config that matches what Fedora ships. Starting from
the stock config for the kernel you're rebuilding is a far saner route
than using one from an old kernel though. Its even the method used in
the "Building a custom kernel" wiki page I provided a link to. One more
time, just in case:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Building_a_custom_kernel

Had you followed that, your kernel would have probably worked just
fine on the first try.


> If that is what is supposed to happen, than the oldconfig target is not 
> doing its job as there are plethora of kernel options I have not been 
> asked, nor were they included in the resultant .config file (the example 
> with CONFIG_DRM_NOVEAU I have given above).
> 
> If, on the other hand, I have done this the wrong way and the oldconfig 
> target is supposed to be used only between minor revisions of the 
> kernel, then, as I did not know that, this is something I will bear in 
> mind in the future.

See above.


>> I have been building kernels for more than 35 years,
>> so I know what I am saying is correct.
> I do not question your ability in any way, I am grateful for the help 
> you provided me with. That, unfortunately, cannot be said for the other 
> two window-licking jamooks who 'participated' in this thread!

Just fyi, its considered bad etiquette to reply to private responses
with the list cc'd. Not a single one of JD's mails went to the list.
And eloquent though yours may be, slinging insults around is also
generally considered bad etiquette, and goes against Fedora project
policies, per the link Paul just provided.

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jarod at wilsonet.com