Linux - SoftwareThis forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum.
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.
just to clarify , that 'ls -1' should be 'ls -L' (but lowercase 'EL')... on mine the 'linux' directory is just a link that 'points' to linux-2.4.20 and linux-2.4.20 is the *real* directory ...so in windows terms the 'linux' directory is a shortcut to the linux-2.4.20 directory.
yes, you do have the source installed ..probably the linux-2.4 and redhat directories *point* to the linux-2.4.20-8 directory. so just 'cd' into one of those directories and it should be cool.
that would be becuase the *linux* directory *points* to a 'tar.gz' archive *not* a directory as it should :)
im assuming you downloaded those .bz2 and .tar.gz kernels eh?
it also seems you have already 'extracted' one of them... in which case do:
(as root) cd /usr/src rm -f linux <-- it's nothing important don't worry ln -s linux-2.4.21 linux <-- this will point a *link* name 'linux' at the linux-2.4.21 directory , which then you will be able to : cd linux
I tried to build the kernel, and I think the chicken got burned!
This is the last few lines of bzImage. There were 3 guides that I was referring to at the time, all said to do this before make modules and make modules_install. Sorry if I erred by not following your instructions exactly on that point. Anyway, if you can help, here are the last few lines. I'll post and leave the machine as is while I get some sleep.
namei.c: In function `vfs_rename_dir':
namei.c:1785: internal error: Segmentation fault
Please submit a full bug report,
with preprocessed source if appropriate.
See <URL:http://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/> for instructions.
make: *** [namei.o] Error 1
make: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.21/fs'
make: *** [first_rule] Error 2
make: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-2.4.21/fs'
make: *** [_dir_fs] Error 2
Well, I currently have ext3, but in the make menuconfig choices I did try to add support for Reiserfs (heard it's faster than ext3). Also, I don't know if it matters, but my Windoze hdd is set to mount in /etc/fstab and is actually mounted now. It's fat32, or in Linux, maybe I should say vfat.
This was the 2 lines right above that other post:
gcc -D__KERNEL__ -I/usr/src/linux-2.4.21/include -Wall -Wstrict-prototypes -Wno-trigraphs -O2 -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -pipe -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2 -march=i686 -nostdinc -iwithprefix include -DKBUILD_BASENAME=namei -c -o namei.o namei.c
You know I'm going to keep hammering on this thing until it fits! Even stuff like this beats the heck out of those typical Windoze problems! My box is still running, since I haven't actually committed anything yet.
Last edited by Bruce Hill; 07-15-2003 at 06:22 PM.
How easy is it to change from Redhat to Slackware? Don't get me wrong, I like RH stuff, but I fear that RH will eventually be to Linux what MS is to Windows and am now looking for alternatives. What are your views?
gnu/linux is gnu/linux is gnu/linux is.....you get the idea..
it all depends on how attachted are you to your redhat graphical configs...?
..it's really not that hard to switch ...tho..just takes a little more elbow grease and love
i know redhat has done some things that make people wonder ..but i don't think that it
would justify using the RedHat name in the same sentence as the word 'Microsoft'...and
especially one should not perform a direct comparison between the two ;)
I agree and disagree with Jeremy. Linux is the kernel, and as such, it's the same. But each distro is different in some ways. Installing a distro is more like installing an OS, from Windoze terminology. You get more than just the kernel. Some distros give you more additional applications and configuration than others. Read the LQ Reviews pages and see if anything said there triggers your *nix desire.
I was using RedHat when this thread started, and switched from there to Debian, and now Slackware. RedHat just had too many packages loaded for me (587 when I did the bare minimum install) and I couldn't figure out what I could get rid of, so I got rid of RedHat.
I've called RedHat "M$ Jr." but that really isn't fair. It's still got the Linux kernel, and you can strip it down and customize it the way you want. It's just that RH is a commercial distribution and therefore, it's necessary for them to make it more "point and click" like Micro$loth does with Windoze so that the general population can install and use it. I repair and build computers, and at least 99% of Windoze users I've met don't read the first document. They want their computer to "just work" when they grab the mouse, and when it doesn't, they call guys like me. This group of people doesn't even take the time to use the Windoze Start menu and then the Help icon and see what's there. IMO that's the group that RH is designed to capture. May they have each other and live in blissful ignorance
Slackware was one of the first, if not the first, Linux distro. It is really stable, and comes with plenty of stuff. However, it's still fairly easy to remove what you don't want, or just not install it to start with. When you install Slack you can choose every single thing that you install (not so with RH), or you can just install all it's got on the CD's. Just take your time installing and make sure to print the file Slackware-HOWTO from CD-1 before you actually install it. This is the "Slackware Linux CD-ROM Installation HOWTO," and IMO it's very comprehensive. If someone has trouble installing Slack after reading that document, they probably aren't ready to try and run a *nix distro yet.
So, if you want to try Slack, just download the first two Slack CD's and you're good to go. The installer was easy to me, with a few months of Linux experience only. Now I'm just trying to get it all customized the way I want.
My goal is to format c:/q Windblows right out of my computer, and I think I'm pretty close