I am trying to compile and use the new 2.6.0 kernel (Stoned Beaver). These
are the steps I took:

1-downloaded and unzipped the source kernel in my user home dir, ~.

2-cd /usr/src/linux: make mrproper

3-cd ~ make xconfig, save.

4-make bzImage (or do I need to do "make install"? since I have lilo
installed? README file was not very clear here)

5-make modules;

6-su, make modules_install;

7-cp /home/me/linux-2.6.0/arch/i386/boot/bzImage /boot/bzImage.2.6.0

8- edited /etc/lilo.conf, ran /sbin/lilo, it ran fine with new kernel
imagerecognized.

my video card is vesa compatible NVIDIA, LCD screen; here is the graphic
portion of .config file:

# Graphics support
#
# CONFIG_FB is not set
CONFIG_VIDEO_SELECT=y

#
# Console display driver support
#
CONFIG_VGA_CONSOLE=y
# CONFIG_MDA_CONSOLE is not set
CONFIG_DUMMY_CONSOLE=y

Now when I choose the new kernel to boot, I end up with a black blank
screen.

What I am missing please? Any one care to comment? I did not see any mention
of "make dep" or making symbolic link to /usr/src/linux in README file.
Obviously the procedure for compiling kernel has changed and is improved.
The Semi_official tutorial sites are also mostly being revised and good
ones are down.

Thanks.

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 01:23:53 GMT,
SuperDeamon <me@BugusISP.invalid.com> wrote:
>
> I am trying to compile and use the new 2.6.0 kernel (Stoned Beaver). These
> are the steps I took:

[snip]

> # CONFIG_FB is not set

> Now when I choose the new kernel to boot, I end up with a black blank
> screen.

I think you'll need to compile in framebuffer support to fix this.
(Slackware has framebuffer support by default). Alternatively, modifying
your vga line in lilo.conf would probably work. (You'd probably end up with a
fairly ugly looking console though).

The following FAQ entry may help in finding the framebuffer options,
although if it's out-of-date with 2.6, please let us know.
<http://wombat.san-francisco.ca.us/faqomatic/cache/92.html>. Thanks.


--
Mark Hill <usenet@mark.ukfsn.org> (Yahoo address not read)
GPG KeyID: 4A3B58AC

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 01:23:53 GMT, SuperDeamon <me@BugusISP.invalid.com> wrote:
> I am trying to compile and use the new 2.6.0 kernel (Stoned Beaver). These
> are the steps I took:

Ummm... the beaver is out of detox now.

IIRC, the order went:

2.6.0-test10: Stoned Beaver
2.6.0-test11: Beaver in Detox
2.6.0: The beaver is out of detox

From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
To: Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Linux 2.6.0
Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 20:14:06 -0800 (PST)

"The beaver is out of detox"
- Anon

This should not be a big surprise to anybody on the list any more, since
we've been building up to it for a long time now, and for the last few
weeks I haven't accepted any patches except for what amounts to fairly
obvious one-liners.

<...>

I had to fix the formatting for that cut and paste, sorry if I made any
errors.

--
Rob | If not safe,
Email and Jabber: | one can never be free.
athlonrob at axpr dot net |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/5AXjhm6KEoOOAe0RAuZGAKCg7AB4WrqKKYmSXcNYWvQtqZyMFw CePhv3
4z8dph+MSWvX2YoItnJsQzs=
=zCMB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

AthlonRob <junkmail@axpr.net> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message

pgp trash troll delete

> From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
> To: Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> Subject: Linux 2.6.0
> Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 20:14:06 -0800 (PST)
What does Linus have to say about pgp trash trolling? We're
betting that he'd agree that the unwarranted use of pgp violates
this ng's policy and for that reason is forbidden.

cordially, as always,

rm

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 08:42:29 +0000, dcba wrote:

> AthlonRob <junkmail@axpr.net> wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>> NotDashEscaped: You need GnuPG to verify this message
>
> pgp trash troll delete
>
>> From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
>> To: Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
>> Subject: Linux 2.6.0
>> Date: Wed, 17 Dec 2003 20:14:06 -0800 (PST)
> What does Linus have to say about pgp trash trolling? We're
> betting that he'd agree that the unwarranted use of pgp violates
> this ng's policy and for that reason is forbidden.
>
> cordially, as always,
>
> rm

Why not enlighten the world with the source of "this ng's policy"
regarding pgp?

the post: ng FAQ #46: read before posting! (posted 2003-12-19) says
nothing whatsoever regarding pgp either directly or indirectly.

Perhaps your should authenticate yourself the the FAQ-o-matic via some
encryption/certification mechanism, say, PGP, for example, and update it
such that it informs the world of the evils of PGP keys in signature files?

Cordially as ever,

Grey

--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
/"\ ASCII Ribbon Campaign
\ / Against HTML
X in e-mail & news
/ \ jim %$# bottino ELIPSIS com
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Symbols = AT, ELIPSIS = dot
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Greyhame <ceo@bottino.com> wrote:

> Why not enlighten the world with the source of "this ng's policy"
> regarding pgp?

The admonishment has been cut out of the FAQ. The FAQ is
maintained by a pgp trash troll. But they can't "cut out" standard
netiquette and standard netiquette, as well as this ng's policy,
holds that the unwarranted use of pgp in unacceptable.

Open your eyes.

cordially, as always,

rm

On Sat, 20 Dec 2003 19:38:04 +0000, dcba wrote:

> Greyhame <ceo@bottino.com> wrote:
>
>> Why not enlighten the world with the source of "this ng's policy"
>> regarding pgp?
>
> The admonishment has been cut out of the FAQ. The FAQ is maintained by
> a pgp trash troll. But they can't "cut out" standard netiquette and
> standard netiquette, as well as this ng's policy, holds that the
> unwarranted use of pgp in unacceptable.
>
> Open your eyes.
>
> cordially, as always,
>
> rm

The closest thing I found to a "Standard Netiquette" document is written
by S. Moynes.

Scott Moynes' Netiquette document states:

PGP signatures as mime attachments are fine (attachments for signatures
are actually better than an inline signature as they are RFC compliant
and they are easier to ignore if you don't have PGP).

Warren Layton disagrees that GPG signatures must be placed inline.
DaveEdwards: I agree with Warren -- PGP-Mime attachments are quite
acceptable.

So, in other words, there is no such source. The so called "standard
netiquette" document suggests that PGP signatures are fine.

This ng's policy says nothing about pgp. Consequently, it is offensive to
you, specifically, and no one else. If it were offensive to others, such
a policy would be stated. As it is not stated, no such policy exists. It
would take almost no effort to create such a byline; it has not been done.

While I have no need for sending pgp signatures, I see no problem with
others doing so. The only conceivable complaint would be the weak one of
wasted bandwidth. The argument is weakened by the manifold wastes of
bandwidth you create with every post to which you troll.

Overall, I am pleased that there is someone on earth that has so much time
on his hands that he can offer unsolicited advice on theoretical,
undocumented netiquette. Perhaps, if ever you tire of trolling and wish
to use your apparently abundant time for greater good, you might wish to
wash my car? Or, perhaps, take up a very worthy cause, such as feeding
the poor.

In your absence, while your extra time is spent helping those who truly
need it, I'm certain this ng can muddle along without your guidance,
difficult as it may be.

Cordially as ever,

Grey

Greyhame <ceo@bottino.com> wrote:

> The closest thing I found to a "Standard Netiquette" document is written
> by S. Moynes.

> Scott Moynes' Netiquette document states:

And of course, this is emaili, not usenet, that you are referring to.

> PGP signatures as mime attachments are fine (attachments
> for signatures are actually better than an inline
> signature as they are RFC compliant and they are easier
> to ignore if you don't have PGP).

Ah! Mime attachments!

> Warren Layton disagrees that GPG signatures must be
> placed inline. DaveEdwards: I agree with Warren --
> PGP-Mime attachments are quite acceptable.

Mime attachments!

G'nite Wanda,

cordially, as always,

rm

>>Now when I choose the new kernel to boot, I end up with a black blank
>>screen.
>
>
> I think you'll need to compile in framebuffer support to fix this.
> (Slackware has framebuffer support by default). Alternatively, modifying
> your vga line in lilo.conf would probably work. (You'd probably end up with a
> fairly ugly looking console though).

Actually I just complied 2.6.0 on my computer and had the same problem.
To fix it I removed framebuffer devices from graphics support. I was
using plain vga consoles though.

Mark Hill wrote:

> The following FAQ entry may help in finding the framebuffer options,
> although if it's out-of-date with 2.6, please let us know.
> <http://wombat.san-francisco.ca.us/faqomatic/cache/92.html>. Thanks.
>

Thanks Mark:

Developmental and/or experimental modules are still there in 2.6 kernel,
albeit new ones, as well as frame buffer support. So "~faq/92.html" should
not be too much out of date.

As my problem of not getting screen going; I compiled support for my NVIDIA
card as a module (M instead of Y) and all was fine. I might just have found
a kernel bug since saying yes to:

CONFIG_FB_RIVA=( )

was failing on this machine.

what I have is this:

# Frame-buffer support

CONFIG_FB=y
CONFIG_DUMMY_CONSOLE=y
CONFIG_FB_RIVA=m

and it works.