Re: Not showing ac2

Re: Not showing ac2

[backblue]

hy Pedro,

Just check if the source was really patched, maybe the source does not patch de Makefile and did not changed the EXTRAVERSION var that is where it should be changed, maybe the -ac2 patch it's for 2.6.0-test1 original, and nor for 
2.6.0-test1-ac1, that's it, just edit the Makefile, and change the EXTRAVERSION to -ac2 and recompile everything and, your are done, you have uname -a, like you want.


On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 08:43:27 +0100
Pedro Ribeiro <deadheart@netcabo.pt> wrote:

> I've just installed the ac2 patch from a clean 2.6.0-test1 tree and when 
> I do uname -a it says 2.6.0-test1-ac1. Is that normal? The modules dir 
> (in /lib/modules) also says ac1.
> 
> PR
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Not showing ac2

[Pedro Ribeiro]

I've just installed the ac2 patch from a clean 2.6.0-test1 tree and when 
I do uname -a it says 2.6.0-test1-ac1. Is that normal? The modules dir 
(in /lib/modules) also says ac1.

PR

Re: Not showing ac2

[junkio]

>>>>> "bb" == backblue  <backblue@netcabo.pt> writes:

bb> Just check if the source was really patched, maybe the
bb> source does not patch de Makefile and did not changed the
bb> EXTRAVERSION var that is where it should be changed, maybe
bb> the -ac2 patch it's for 2.6.0-test1 original, and nor for
bb> 2.6.0-test1-ac1, that's it, just edit the Makefile, and
bb> change the EXTRAVERSION to -ac2 and recompile everything
bb> and, your are done, you have uname -a, like you want.

All of the above are sound suggestions in general, but in this
particular case of 2.6.0-test-ac2, Alan just forgot to bump the
EXTRAVERSION to -ac2 when he created the patch.

Just update EXTRAVERSION in the toplevel Makefile by hand and
rebuild, to get "uname -a" output fixed.