I use SuSE 9.1 with vanilla kernel 2.6.8 with no bootsplash. I applied the patch: bootsplash-3.1.3-2.6.0-test9.diff and then used kernel upgrade patch: patch-2.6.9 and recompiled to get this crap: drivers/char/n_tty.c: In function `read_chan': drivers/char/n_tty.c:1181: warning: unused variable `b' drivers/char/n_tty.c:1182: warning: unused variable `wait' drivers/char/n_tty.c:1183: warning: unused variable `c' drivers/char/n_tty.c:1184: warning: unused variable `minimum' drivers/char/n_tty.c:1184: warning: unused variable `time' drivers/char/n_tty.c:1185: warning: unused variable `retval' drivers/char/n_tty.c:1186: warning: unused variable `size' drivers/char/n_tty.c:1187: warning: unused variable `timeout' drivers/char/n_tty.c:1188: warning: unused variable `flags' drivers/char/n_tty.c:1190: warning: label `do_it_again' defined but not used drivers/char/n_tty.c: At top level: drivers/char/n_tty.c:1245: error: redefinition of 'read_chan' drivers/char/n_tty.c:1180: error: previous definition of 'read_chan' was here drivers/char/n_tty.c: In function `read_chan': drivers/char/n_tty.c:1262: warning: implicit declaration of function `job_control' drivers/char/n_tty.c: At top level: drivers/char/n_tty.c:1180: warning: 'read_chan' defined but not used make[2]: *** [drivers/char/n_tty.o] Error 1 make[1]: *** [drivers/char] Error 2 make: *** [drivers] Error 2 Fuzzy:/usr/src/linux # Is a header missing? When I apply the patch to the 2.6.8 source, I get this (entire output): patching file drivers/char/keyboard.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 1058 (offset 13 lines). patching file drivers/char/n_tty.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 989 (offset 20 lines). patching file drivers/char/vt.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 3267 (offset 229 lines). patching file drivers/video/Kconfig Hunk #1 succeeded at 1002 (offset 96 lines). patching file drivers/video/Makefile Hunk #1 succeeded at 6 with fuzz 2. patching file drivers/video/bootsplash/Kconfig patching file drivers/video/bootsplash/Makefile patching file drivers/video/bootsplash/bootsplash.c patching file drivers/video/bootsplash/bootsplash.h patching file drivers/video/bootsplash/decode-jpg.c patching file drivers/video/bootsplash/decode-jpg.h patching file drivers/video/bootsplash/render.c patching file drivers/video/console/fbcon.c Hunk #2 succeeded at 215 with fuzz 2 (offset 13 lines). Hunk #3 succeeded at 419 (offset 4 lines). Hunk #4 succeeded at 443 (offset 4 lines). Hunk #5 succeeded at 972 with fuzz 2 (offset 503 lines). Hunk #6 FAILED at 1010. Hunk #7 FAILED at 1042. Hunk #8 FAILED at 1329. Hunk #9 FAILED at 1412. Hunk #10 succeeded at 1083 (offset 2 lines). Hunk #11 succeeded at 1165 (offset 3 lines). Hunk #12 FAILED at 1475. Hunk #13 FAILED at 1546. Hunk #14 succeeded at 1846 (offset 174 lines). Hunk #15 succeeded at 1935 with fuzz 2 (offset 216 lines). Hunk #16 succeeded at 2056 (offset 259 lines). Hunk #17 FAILED at 2234. Hunk #18 FAILED at 2651. 8 out of 18 hunks FAILED -- saving rejects to file drivers/video/console/fbcon.c.rej patching file drivers/video/console/fbcon.h patching file drivers/video/vesafb.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 171 (offset -3 lines). patching file include/linux/console_struct.h patching file include/linux/fb.h Hunk #1 FAILED at 412. 1 out of 1 hunk FAILED -- saving rejects to file include/linux/fb.h.rej patching file kernel/panic.c Hunk #1 succeeded at 82 (offset -1 lines). Hunk #2 succeeded at 111 (offset -1 lines). Fuzzy:/usr/src/linux-2.6.8 # I WANT BOOTSPLASH TO WORK!
On Saturday 30 October 2004 14:41, Steven Pasternak wrote:
I use SuSE 9.1 with vanilla kernel 2.6.8 with no bootsplash. I applied the patch: bootsplash-3.1.3-2.6.0-test9.diff and then used kernel upgrade patch: patch-2.6.9 and recompiled to get this crap:
drivers/char/n_tty.c: In function `read_chan': ... Hunk #2 succeeded at 111 (offset -1 lines). Fuzzy:/usr/src/linux-2.6.8 #
I WANT BOOTSPLASH TO WORK!
Calm down. No need to yell. a) Get the 2.6.8 kernel source .src.rpm from the update/9.2/rpm/src directory, and rip the bootsplash patch out (hope it applies cleanly). or b) Install the 2.6.8 kernel from the update/9.2/rpm/i586 (this is an option, but I warn you there might be a risk). or c) Locate the failing hunks your self, and apply the patch manually at those points. Usually there is not much difference. 1 wrong character can cause a hunk to fail. Cheers, Leen
participants (2)
-
Leendert Meyer
-
Steven Pasternak