Re: [PLUG] potato to woody question

[Jeff Abrahamson <jeff@purple.com>]

On Sun, Jul 22, 2001 at 12:01:29PM -0400, Bill Jonas wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 22, 2001 at 09:10:57AM -0400, Jeff Abrahamson wrote:
> > A second, says lspci, is Bridgecom Inc: Unknown device 9851
> > (rev. 11). (It's a Linksys card.) Google makes me think that this card
> > may be hopeless.
> 
> Is it the LNE100TX (EtherFast)?
> http://www.linksys.com/support/support.asp?spid=25

I think so. Cool ref, I'd found many things, but nothing so plain and
simple.


> > A third is 3Com Corporation: Unknown device 9909 (rev. 02). Not enough
> > information to find much on google, it seems.
> 
> Try going into the kernel source directory, doing a 'make menuconfig',
> and looking at the options for various cards to see if yours is there.
> It would be helpful if you posted the model name of your card.

It would be helpful if I could figure it out. The card does not
identify itself, neither visually nor via lspci. I don't have a box
for it or anything useful like that.


> > 1. Am I confused? Apt-get upgraded many things, but not, apparently,
> > anything kernel related. Is this intentional? Yes, I could recompile
> > the kernel, but I still have to think a lot when I do that, and I've
> > made errors before that render my machine inoperable after a kernel
> > compile, something I try to avoid.
> 
> Yes, this is by design.  It's a feature.  ;^)  Do "apt-cache search
> --names-only kernel-image" to see the various kernel-image packages
> available, and pick the one that's most appropriate for your system.  If
> you upgrade to a 2.4 kernel image, you'll need to add
> "initrd=/boot/initrd" to the section for "image=/vmlinuz"; Debian's
> using an initrd image for some strange reason for the 2.4 series. :-/

I tried doing

    apt-get source kernel-image-2.2.18pre21

which is what uname suggested I use. My thought was to compile
tulip.c, downloaded from the URL you proposed above. But this doesn't
give me actual source, just some config files.

Any suggestions on how to get enough source/header files in /usr/src
to be able to compile tulip.c?

Seems like I must be missing something obvious, but it's not obvious
yet...


> > 2. Why does apt-get say it's holding back certain packages when I do a
> > dist-upgrade?
> 
> If all packages won't have all their dependencies satisfies, apt-get
> will attempt to upgrade the more important packages at the expense of
> the less important packages.  The man page has slightly more
> information.

Ah, that makes sense. I'd read it, but it didn't click that this was
the same thing I was seeing. Thanks.

-- 
 Jeff

 Jeff Abrahamson  <http://www.purple.com/jeff/>



______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group       -      http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  -  http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug