=== chuck__ is now known as zul [00:41] hi [00:41] i made an apt-get source linux-source, and it gave me an empty linux-meta folder with a debian folder [00:41] is this right?:S [00:42] Angelus: technically, yes ;) [00:42] since linux-source is an empty package that depends on the version of linux-source you want [00:42] (try apt-get source linux-source-2.6.22 :p) [00:42] ahhh [00:42] ok [00:43] cause the guide on the wiki only says to do "apt-get source linux-source" [00:43] hehe [00:45] ok Keybuk it worked, thanks alot [00:55] is it posible to run make menuconfig to edit one of the configs in /debian/config ? [01:00] AngelusL: you would have to do something like cat one of the configs.* to config [01:04] zul: would doing "make menuconfig" in the kernel source tree, and saving to the .config , then copy it to /debian/config/amd64/config do the trick ? [01:17] Angelus: I would cp debian/config/amd64/config to your kernel source and then cat debian/config/amd64/config.generic to .config and then make menuconfig but its all in the wiki [01:18] zul: the wiki only tells you to edit debian/config/amd64/config or the other flavours [01:18] it doesnt state anything about menuconfig :p [01:18] cat debian/config/am64/config > .config [01:18] cat debian/config/amd64/config.generic >> .config [01:19] copy to your kernel source and then do make menuconfig [01:25] zul: im having this error when i update the configs with debian/rules [01:25] debian/scripts/misc/oldconfig: line 66: /usr/src/linux-source-2.6.22-2.6.22/debian/scripts/misc/splitconfig.pl: Permission denied [01:25] dont run the script just do what I said and then run make menuconfig [01:26] im off to bed [01:26] yes i know zul , but the guide says that after make menuconfig/ or editing the config you must update the configs with that script [03:52] Hi - i'm trying to rebuild git snapshots of my kernel to test for a but and after one successful build, I'm now getting the following error... [03:53] /usr/bin/fakeroot: 166: debian/rules: not found [03:53] how do I get the debian/rules file to exist again? I'm assuming the previous build destroyed it === asac_ is now known as asac === loganx is now known as chellwig [08:46] how do people write device drivers in c [11:53] hi [11:53] which ubuntu kernel supports webcam support [11:53] Bus 004 Device 002: ID 05ca:1837 Ricoh Co., Ltd [11:53] no driver support for it yet? [11:55] any hints appreciated [11:55] does a diff version of the kernel matter? [11:56] anyone awake [13:35] guys [13:35] i compiled a custom kernel [13:36] it created me a bunch of .deb files [13:36] like sata-modules , pata-modules, 4 kenrel images, 4kernel headers [13:36] do i need to install everything? [13:38] iv got all these http://rafb.net/p/t0EQfD51.html [13:39] Angelus: udeb files are for installer only. You can ignore these. [13:40] abogani: and the modules files? the ones like sata-modules? they're installer files? [13:41] Angelus: AFAIK Yes. All files with udeb extension working in Debian Installer only (aka alternate CD in Ubuntu slang). [13:42] ahh [13:42] ok [13:42] thankz mate [13:42] ok last question, for compiling the restricted modules, do i need to install every header package ? like generic, server, rt and the rest? [13:46] I don't know, sorry. === gnomefre1k is now known as gnomefreak [18:03] lamont: I like your dog grooming story [18:05] zul: THANKS [18:05] who hit that caps lock key [21:52] hello [21:52] i compiled the kernel sucesffuly using debian/rules, everything worked fine including restricted drivers, BUT adept is telling me to update from 2.6.22 to 2.6.22 i can't understand why. its the same version as the ubuntu's official version even the ABI number [22:40] please somebody answer me i really need to fix this anoying issue :( [22:50] Angelus: it works as it is supposed to then... [22:50] Angelus: prefer the version from the repos if it is the same version. [22:52] Angelus: you changed it that makes i < ubuntu versions (assuming you either didnt pass all the config options or you passed a config option ubuntu doesnt use === chuck is now known as zul [23:12] gnomefreak: no, why? [23:12] gnomefreak: I'm pretty sure it does what I wrote as well. [23:13] Nafallo: if he changed config options and kept same version its gonna be < ubuntu version [23:13] Nafallo: and gnomefreak i didnt understand you [23:13] it is the same version exacly [23:13] even the abi [23:13] Angelus: you compiled it and didnt change any config options? [23:13] but adept is giving me un update to the repo version [23:14] of course i changed config options [23:14] gnomefreak: if it's the exactly same name on the deb I'm pretty sure it compares what it has in the packagelist against the package that is actually installed. [23:14] i change debian/config/amd64/config [23:14] Nafallo: ubuntu version should rule over personal builds [23:14] afaik [23:14] gnomefreak: that's what I tell you. [23:15] hmm [23:15] Angelus: just pin it if you dont want adept to complain [23:15] is there way i can change the abi number? [23:15] g [23:15] gnomefreak: "how to i pin it" ? [23:15] *do [23:16] Angelus: its a bad idea to keep same version that you build as ubuntus build because if you get them mixed up it can be issues on bug reports ect... [23:16] !pinning [23:16] pinning is an advanced feature that APT can use to prefer particular packages over others. See https://help.ubuntu.com/community/PinningHowto [23:16] Angelus: my packages always have a higher version [23:17] the guide says that doing "debian/rules binary" should generate a unique abi number, in my case it didn't it used same abi number as the kubuntu abi number [23:21] gnomefreak: is there a way to generate a diferent abi number manually? [23:21] Angelus: not sure im not a kernel dev [23:22] so my only choise is pinning? [23:25] Nafallo: do you know how to generate a diferent abi for a custom built kernel? [23:37] <_Thelonius_> hi, anyone here? [23:37] <_Thelonius_> i need help on the compiling of the kernel... [23:37] <_Thelonius_> i cannot enable a module and i dunno why [23:55] guys [23:55] i discovered that my kernel package has a smaller size then the ubuntu kernel [23:55] so i think thats why its telling me to upgrade?