June 1999 - openSUSE Users - openSUSE Mailing Lists

[SuSE Linux] upgrading
by jack＠jarasoft.xs4all.nl 01 Jun '99

01 Jun '99

Hi all, A few weeks ago I bought SuSE linux 6.1 with kernel 2.2.5. How do I upgrade to a higher kernel? (there seems to be a 2.2.9 kernel). I'm a newbie. So a. Where to get the updates? b. How to upgrade? (using YaST or install or ....) With greetings ... Jack Raats -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e Check out the SuSE-FAQ at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A">http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A</A>> and the archive at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A">http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A</A>>

2 1

Re: [SuSE Linux] End of the past... things to come... (fwd)
by samelash＠ix.netcom.com 01 Jun '99

01 Jun '99

Thanks for gnu and open source. At 12:07 PM 5/31/1999 -1000, George Toft wrote: > >Michael Johnson wrote: >> I am so glad to get out of ths creativity-stifling environemnt of RHAD >> LABS - away from certain people there who see E and its userbase as >> what I can literally quote them saying a "festering crowd". >> >> I've tolerated this attitude towards E users for way too long. I do not >> envisage much future support from Red Hat for Enlightenment - they have >> been itching to get rid of E and will as soon as they can. > >Question: If this is RH's attitude toward E, then why >did they make GNOME the default desktop environment with >E as the default wm in RH 6.0? > >It looks more and more like Red Hat is becoming the >Microsoft of the Linux world. Bummer. > >-- >George Toft <A HREF="http://gtoft.dynip.com/LinuxAdvocate/"><A HREF="http://gtoft.dynip.com/LinuxAdvocate/</A">http://gtoft.dynip.com/LinuxAdvocate/</A</A>> > > Consider Linux - Fast, stable, scalable, priced > right and available with commercial support. >-- >To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with >this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e >Check out the SuSE-FAQ at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A">http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A</A>> and the >archive at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A">http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A</A>> > > -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e Check out the SuSE-FAQ at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A">http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A</A>> and the archive at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A">http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A</A>>

1 0

Re: [SuSE Linux] 6.0 kernal upgrade to 2.2.7 and SAMBA 2.0.3
by samelash＠ix.netcom.com 01 Jun '99

01 Jun '99

At 11:50 PM 5/31/1999 +0200, Joop Boonen wrote: >Dear Samy, >Can you please describe your situation. I mean what is your server is it >a the Linux samba server? Are there also windowNT servers in it? Are the >windows machines clients? Do you also want to print trough the samba >machine? If yes can you already print directly form your samba machine? >I think it's about it. Three pcs , one is set up as a samba server . I just rolled it back to 6.0 2.03 kernal and samba 1.9 after formating the drive , reinstalling 6.0 and restroing a couple of data directorys. Few hour work. The samba server has no printer and I have been using the hp5L on the win 98 machine for printing ( this broke when I went to 6.1/2.2.5 kernal and samba 2.0.3) Now all is smoth and working. the samba server comes up in entwork nioeborhood , and doing the smb mounts and smbclients all work on the samba server , no errors , no failed connections. real sweet. It is a little slowere , due to the 2.0 kernal I believe but it now works. The other two pcs are a windows 98 machine that shares its drive and printer. the third machine is a win 95 machine as well that shares its drive and printer. a quick summery of problems, bothe win95/8 amchines could not see any thing in network nieborhood. you could map a drive to the samba server shared dirs either by right clicking Network Nieborhood and mapping it ort using the dos net use e: \\linux\shared. Once there was a drive mapped , on an intermitten basses , sometimes the linuc samba serveer would show in network nioeborhood , but only after doing a search and searching throught the workgroup to get to the server. This worked most of the time. If I turn off file and print sharing on the win98 machine , saved and reboot , the shared linux server magicaly apears. Turn it back on , presto m, gone. Now on the samba server , it will not print to the win98 machine at all. Some timee it will print to the win95 machine , but this would only work 70 0f the time. I could not get a smbclient -L windows machine to go through successfuly. kept getting errors, failed connections ( I think). If I passed it the ip address then it would go throgh and display the machine. Now with smbmount I keep getting failed connections (this I am sure about) . agoein if I pass the ip address it would go through. >I will try to answer the question tomorrow. I have to go to sleep now. >it's night over here now. > >Regards, > >Joop Boonen. > > >Samy Elashmawy wrote: >> >> joop , I have been workingg for two weeks trying to get 6.1 /2.2.5 w samba >> 2.0.4 to work with the windows 95/8machines. NOTHING but trouble so far. >> >> The samba machine cannot see the windows macnines unless I pass the ip >> address , nor will the samba server wint to the win95/8 machine printers( >> it has no printer) >> >> nor will the smba server come ip in network nieborhood unless fist mapped >> to a drive letter. >> >> Real krazzy . I just rolled the whole dserver back to 6.0 and samba 1.9 and >> it works real nice , no troubls. >> >> Any way , I cant figure if its the samba 2.0.3 package thats giving trouble >> or if its the 6.1 / 2.2.5 keranl/system that is causing trouble. >> >> At 11:25 PM 5/31/1999 +0200, you wrote: >> >Samy Elashmawy wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Have any of you successfuly upgraded 6.0 to kernal 2.2.5/7 and successfully >> >> running samba 2.0.3 on this setup ??? >> >> >> >> I have just given up on 6.1 2.2.5 and Samba 2.0.3 and fromatted and rolled >> >> back to 6.0 and 1.9 , that at least will work. >> >> >> >> I am wondering the follwoingt senarios , >> >> >> >> 1/ have any of you gone from 6.0 to the 2.2.5/7 kernal and samba 1.9 >> >> Does this work ? >> > >> >Yes it works perfectly. The new command is: smbmount "\\server\tmp" -c >> >'mount /mnt -u 123 -g 456' >> >This information can be found in the man page. man smbmount >> > >> >> >> >> 2/ have any of you ran 6.0 2.0 kernal with the samba 2.0.3 rmp upgrade for >> >> 6.0? >> > >> >I didn't i ran 6.0 with kernel 2.2.x I had to recompile samba 2.0.x >> >myself after that it worked fine. I have one disadvantage which is that >> >it wasn't a rpm file that makes it very difficult to have control over >> >the installed packages. Now i'm happy that i while using suse 6.1 i can >> >install and deinstall the packages very easily. >> > >> >> >> >> 3/ have any of you gone from 6.0 to the 2.2.5 kernal and samba 2.2.5/7 >> >> upgrade/update , not a complete 6.0 to 6.1 upgrade. I have been unable to >> >> get either an upgraded 6.0 -> 6.1 w Samba 2.0.3 to work properly nor a >> >> CLEAN new install of 6.1 w samba 2.0.3 to work. >> > >> >I did both i first upgraded. Everything worked fine. But i prefer a >> >clean setup so i removed everything expert for /home/* . This gives me >> >a system that i can control very easily. There won't be any surprises. >> > >> >Anyway i'm very happy with suse 6.1 even tough it gets upgraded in the >> >meanwhile. I think it's quite logical as Linux is a fast evolving >> >operating system that needs fixes. But i prefer that these fixes will >> >also be available for users of older suse 6.1 versions. Btw the way >> >there is a update directory for suse 6.1 i hope all update packages are >> >in it. I saw for instance the last yast version. >> >> >> >> thanks >> >> >> >> All >> >> >> >> -- >> >> To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with >> >> this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e >> >> Check out the SuSE-FAQ at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A">http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A</A>> and the >> >> archive at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A">http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A</A>> >> > >> > > > -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e Check out the SuSE-FAQ at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A">http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A</A>> and the archive at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A">http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A</A>>

1 0

Re: [SuSE Linux] 6.0 kernal upgrade to 2.2.7 and SAMBA 2.0.3
by samelash＠ix.netcom.com 01 Jun '99

01 Jun '99

At 04:45 PM 5/31/1999 -0500, Robert C. Paulsen, Jr. wrote: >Samy Elashmawy wrote: >> Have any of you successfuly upgraded 6.0 to kernal 2.2.5/7 and successfully >> running samba 2.0.3 on this setup ??? >I had trouble with that when I had 6.0 and decided to wait for 6.1 >before updating the kernel. >> I have just given up on 6.1 2.2.5 and Samba 2.0.3 and fromatted and rolled >> back to 6.0 and 1.9 , that at least will work. > >I have no trouble with Samba 2.0.3 and the 2.2.5 kernel on 6.1. How did you get to 2.0.3/2.2.5 ? was it a format and install , or an upgrade , or just a complete fresh install over the old verion. Are you seeing the samba server in network nieborhood ? on the samba server can you do a smbclient -L winserver and get back a responce with all shared devises ? I can do niether , on the smba server I bet failed connections and errors. This ALL went away when I rolled it back to 2.0 keranl/1.9 samba I have noticed the server is a little slower with the 2.0 kernal , especialy with java apps over the network >I HAVE ATTACHED MY SMB.CONF BELOW in case this helps you. Robert , thanks for the file , I will be making a descision on how to procede , once I read a few mor posts. Thanks for the file , I will try a modified version later. >> >> I am wondering the follwoingt senarios , >> >> 1/ have any of you gone from 6.0 to the 2.2.5/7 kernal and samba 1.9 >> Does this work ? >Never tried this. >> 2/ have any of you ran 6.0 2.0 kernal with the samba 2.0.3 rmp upgrade for >> 6.0? >Close. I had this working but it was Samba 2.0.1. ANY problems (se above) >> 3/ have any of you gone from 6.0 to the 2.2.5 kernal and samba 2.2.5/7 >> upgrade/update , not a complete 6.0 to 6.1 upgrade. I have been unable to >> get either an upgraded 6.0 -> 6.1 w Samba 2.0.3 to work properly nor a >> CLEAN new install of 6.1 w samba 2.0.3 to work. >I got to 6.1 by updating in-place a 6.0 installation. It gave me the new >kernel and the new Samba and all is working well. I first installed over 6.0 cia upgrade system . It has NEVER WORKED PROPERLY for some reason ____________________________________________________________________ >Robert Paulsen <A HREF="http://paulsen.home.texas.net"><A HREF="http://paulsen.home.texas.net</A">http://paulsen.home.texas.net</A</A>> > >===================[ smb.conf follows ]========================== ># Samba config file created using SWAT ># from home.paulsen.org (192.168.0.1) ># Date: 1999/05/31 13:51:21 > ># Global parameters > workgroup = PAULSEN > server string = Samba 2.0.3 on Home > encrypt passwords = Yes > null passwords = Yes > password level = 8 > log file = /var/log/samba/log.%m > max log size = 50 > socket options = TCP_NODELAY > os level = 65 > hosts allow = localhost 192.168. > >[homes] > comment = Home Directories > read only = No > create mask = 0750 > browseable = No > >[cdrom] > comment = CD-ROM > path = /cdrom > >[printers] > comment = All Printers > path = /tmp > create mask = 0700 > guest ok = Yes > print ok = Yes > >[shared] > comment = shared directory > path = /home/shared > read only = No > guest ok = Yes > > -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e Check out the SuSE-FAQ at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A">http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A</A>> and the archive at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A">http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A</A>>

1 0

Re: [SuSE Linux] SuSE has updated boxed 6.1 set 2.2.5 -> 2.2.7
by mha＠suse.de 01 Jun '99

01 Jun '99

On Mon, 31 May 1999, Ben Rosenberg wrote: Ok, you said no more on this subject, but I have one last reply... ... > track and my other bitch was if the 2.2.5 kernel and accompanying > packages were causing enough of a problem that they had to revise it .. > they should have just told us this. I would have gladly paid $15+ for a > new set of cd's minus the box and book .. and yes paid the shipping. It I _think_ (again: no decision maker) we couldn't handle the additional load of creating this. > just seems that whoever was in charge of the releases didn't think to > clearly when doing so .. and in turn pissed a few people off. I have had > virtually not problems on the 10 or so boxen that I have put 6.1 2.2.5 > on so I will just wait for 6.2 or 6.5 whatever the next release is .. > > Oh well. This is the last I will say on the subject. I just hope SuSE > gets back on track and takes the old Orsen Wells wine commercials to > heart .." We shall release no distribution before it's time." 6.1 didn't come out 'before it's time', IMHO. Yes, it's less stable than some previous releases. But, this has nothing to do with SuSE not doing its job. After all, all three major components, the kernel, the glibc and also the compiler (we compiled the kernel with good ol' gcc, but many c++ programs need one of the more recent compilers, for example) are not only new but still in the process of late development/bug fixing. The worst is maybe glibc, where there are even incompatibilities among the versions. However, I'd not like to see the messages on this list if we hadn't shipped the new stuff. -- Michael Hasenstein <A HREF="http://www.csn.tu-chemnitz.de/~mha/"><A HREF="http://www.csn.tu-chemnitz.de/~mha/</A">http://www.csn.tu-chemnitz.de/~mha/</A</A>> Private Pilot (ASEL) since 1998 -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e Check out the SuSE-FAQ at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A">http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A</A>> and the archive at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A">http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A</A>>

1 0

Re: [SuSE Linux] SuSE has updated boxed 6.1 set 2.2.5 -> 2.2.7
by mha＠suse.de 01 Jun '99

01 Jun '99

On Mon, 31 May 1999, Michael Perry wrote: > I would like to comment on the SuSE folks posting or not posting to this > list. Please consider carefully removing yourself from this list. I look > forward to seeing Lenz's posting but also the others; particularly Mantel's. > Back awhile ago, Bodo Bauer's postings were quite interesting and I always > felt that the support folks like Josh offer a good viewpoint on things. The > list has always felt rather comfortable and like a real community where we > often welcome newcomers with not only hospitality but good advice. I really > like SuSE's participation whether its controversial or not. Even if they > don't discuss beer :) > > Seriously, I hope that everyone can place their agreements or disagreements > or even agree to disagree at a level which will allow us to continue to > enjoy SuSE's participation on the list. I think without the other SuSE > posters we do irreparable harm to our mission. I think our mission is to > impart knowledge on a rather exciting and fun operating system that is > challenging to use and learn, to cuss and discuss developments, and even to > tread past the linux frontier to a more philosophical plane. Lets not place > that into hazard. The problem is when someone replies that he won't buy any SuSE (and will even recommend against it) because of something I've said. If/when that happens I get a lot of trouble, of course. Participation in public discussion with an employer-address is high-risk (for me and my temper...). -- Michael Hasenstein <A HREF="http://www.csn.tu-chemnitz.de/~mha/"><A HREF="http://www.csn.tu-chemnitz.de/~mha/</A">http://www.csn.tu-chemnitz.de/~mha/</A</A>> Private Pilot (ASEL) since 1998 -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e Check out the SuSE-FAQ at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A">http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A</A>> and the archive at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A">http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A</A>>

1 0

Re: [SuSE Linux] SuSE has updated boxed 6.1 set 2.2.5 -> 2.2.7
by mha＠suse.de 01 Jun '99

01 Jun '99

On Mon, 31 May 1999, Ben Rosenberg wrote: > your " opinions " to /dev/null from now on. No worries .. I will never > again be in a position to offend your delicate sensibilities :) And you've said TO ME I can't deal with debate?! Why don't you have a look in the mirror? -- Michael Hasenstein <A HREF="http://www.csn.tu-chemnitz.de/~mha/"><A HREF="http://www.csn.tu-chemnitz.de/~mha/</A">http://www.csn.tu-chemnitz.de/~mha/</A</A>> Private Pilot (ASEL) since 1998 -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e Check out the SuSE-FAQ at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A">http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A</A>> and the archive at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A">http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A</A>>

1 0

Re: [SuSE Linux] Suse 6.1.? kernels
by kukuk＠suse.de 01 Jun '99

01 Jun '99

Hello, On Mon, May 31, Geoff' Horn wrote: > > OK, so some may get 2.2.7 kernels. Where are the SuSE patches for > the rest of us with 2.2.5. Can I use the updates from > ftp.kernel.org, are they compatible with SuSE's? You could find all you need under <A HREF="ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/6.1"><A HREF="ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/6.1</A">ftp://ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/i386/6.1</A</A>> Some of the patches from 2.2.6/7 are already in 2.2.5, so I think you will see some rejects. Thorsten -- Thorsten Kukuk <A HREF="http://www.suse.de/~kukuk/"><A HREF="http://www.suse.de/~kukuk/</A">http://www.suse.de/~kukuk/</A</A>> kukuk(a)suse.de SuSE GmbH Schanzaeckerstr. 10 90443 Nuernberg Linux is like a Vorlon. It is incredibly powerful, gives terse, cryptic answers and has a lot of things going on in the background. -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e Check out the SuSE-FAQ at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A">http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A</A>> and the archive at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A">http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A</A>>

1 0

Re: [SuSE Linux] 6.1 set 2.2.5 -> 2.2.7
by mha＠suse.de 01 Jun '99

01 Jun '99

On Mon, 31 May 1999, lunaslide wrote: > Samy Elashmawy wrote: > > > > IN other words they are noww distributing 2.2.7 on cdrom with complete > > packages . > > BUT those of use who got and paid for 2.2.5 CAN NOT GET 2.2.7. Of course you can. Use ftp.kernel.org or, if you want a SuSE rpm (I always use .tar.gz for the kernel; everything else rpm, but using a tar.gz for the kernel doesn't mess up the system in any way), see ftp.suse.com/pub/suse/ Besides, you paid for 6.1, and the announcement and the package both say "comes with kernel 2.2.5". Only now did you learn that there's a 2.2.7 version out there, but you made the decision to buy knowing that you'd get 2.2.5. See my other mail, also the part where I say that I started at SuSE on 1 March (so I'm still new) and that I've nothing to do with any decision process, and that I'd have these same thoughts/opinion even if I didn't work for SuSE. Also, a simple question, in what way WOULD YOUR SITUATION BE DIFFERENT if there was NO SuSE Linux 6.1 with 2.2.7 out there??? So what did YOU loose? IMHO nothing at all! > > Come on folks , this is just two much. I can't quite follow. > Actually, it's too much. It's understandable that bugfixes should be > slipstreamed into the current distribution, but all those changes and > fixes should also be immediately available and explained on the ftp > site, separarated into german and international directories. It would > also be nice if SuSE announced those updates on this mailing list. Only security fixes or fixes for things that didn't work. Everything else is too much - who'd know what to download (I'm talking about guys with a modem who'd only like to have the _necessary_ fixes) if all that stuff was there? > Those who have complained about slow downloads when getting updates need > to go pray to the Great God of Bandwidth for DSL or cable. Ftp and web > sites are a perfectly acceptable way of providing updates and the > download time is your problem, not theirs. -- Michael Hasenstein <A HREF="http://www.csn.tu-chemnitz.de/~mha/"><A HREF="http://www.csn.tu-chemnitz.de/~mha/</A">http://www.csn.tu-chemnitz.de/~mha/</A</A>> Private Pilot (ASEL) since 1998 -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e Check out the SuSE-FAQ at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A">http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A</A>> and the archive at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A">http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A</A>>

1 0

Re: [SuSE Linux] 2.2.5 ->2.2.9
by graham＠barnowl.demon.co.uk 01 Jun '99

01 Jun '99

Michael Perry <mperry(a)znet.com> writes: > You could download the kernel sources and compile it. I like the approach > in the kernel howto. There may be some issues with software on the system > that you have to consider. There usually is a changes file which > accompanies the kernel tarball archive which describes all this stuff. I don't think that there are any changes (in other software) needed to go from 2.2.x to 2.2.9. -- To get out of this list, please send email to majordomo(a)suse.com with this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e Check out the SuSE-FAQ at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A">http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/</A</A>> and the archive at <A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html"><A HREF="http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A">http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html</A</A>>

1 0