Linux - NewbieThis Linux forum is for members that are new to Linux.
Just starting out and have a question?
If it is not in the man pages or the how-to's this is the place!
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
I can't believe i almost had it the other day and now i'm back getting errors. That makes no sense. I don't know what else to do. I tryed the commands that masterc and whansard gave me. I still get error. From both of them. They gave me clear instructions.
Well, we can move onto getting the older gcc on here and come back to this later. I've actually gotta get ready for work right now, but I'll post a lot of info tonight from work so you can have some things to do tomorrow (unless someone else picks up before then).
derek, when you entered this command earlier, you
missed the dash between the kernel-includes
i entered it that way wrong the first time myself, and then
went back to edit my post.
also, the ln -sf doesn't delete a preexisting softlink.
i think derek accidently left a space in the command
when he first tried it, and now there's a softlink
called linux, and it's in the way.
so try again. rm /usr/src/linux
then redo ln -s /usr/src/linux-2.4.20-8 /usr/src/linux
You normally can remove a symlink with rm, however since your symlink isn't really pointing to anything good, let's just try to see if needs some quotes:
And see what you get. Keep the quotes there, type it exactly like I have above, and see what happens. While we are at it, we need to remove other things in there, so type this as well, exactly:
And then try again with the symlink:
ln -sf /usr/src/linux-2.4.20-8 /usr/src/linux
Cool, so here we go down the lonely road of gcc...
For ease, lets do this all via the command line, so open up your favorite terminal, su - to root, and 'begin we will, your Jedi training':
First, let's get the new one on there, better to have 2 versions than none at all. Gotta go lookup which version RH has...
Ok, so now I am even more confused. It appears that RH 9 ships with GCC-3.2 If that is so, then why is the kernel that comes with it compiled with GCC-2.x? Or am I missing something? Is this driver compiled with GCC-2.x and is complaining because your kernel was 3.2?
Ok, read back through the thread, and it's this post:
This is what i tryed. insmod pctel. This is the message i got. The module you are trying to load (/lib/modules/2.4.20-8/misc/pctel.o) is compiled with a gcc version 2 compiler while the kernel you are running is compiled with gcc version 3 compiler. This is known to not work. Why did i get that message?? Thanks.
That started out the gcc ideas it appears. Ok, so I am going to have to disagree on the switching compilers bit. The module is more than likely a binary, and you are going to have to rebuild a kernel with the older compiler (and in turn break many other things) just to get this to work. Nah. I think instead you might find a source type package, or, as mentioned in a few other posts, an actual RPM/Source RPM that we could work with.
Downgrading from gcc-3.2.2 is really not a good idea anyway, and to break alot of other things on your system to do it, well that's just sounding like a bad idea to me.
If anyone has some thoughts on this, please post em.
Distribution: RH 6.2, Gen2, Knoppix,arch, bodhi, studio, suse, mint
i can't believe i got that backwards. my brain switched the
2 gcc's on me. but that info he got from rpm -qa|grep gcc
showed that 3.2.2-5 is installed, not 2.9X. maybe last time
he got 2.9X installed after 3.2.2-5 and 2.9X became the
so shouldn't the modules he just compiled and the current
kernel both be compiled with that same compiler?
maybe he's done now, but doesn't know it.
derek, what was the last error message you got,
when trying to
it's possible you are done, but just don't realize it.
he could have just gotten a message about tainting
the kernel with non-gpl code or something like that.