cpollock at embarqmail.com
Tue Feb 17 15:42:08 UTC 2015
On Tue, 2015-02-17 at 15:55 +0100, Liam Proven wrote:
> On 14 February 2015 at 17:50, Gene Heskett <gheskett at wdtv.com> wrote:
> > You Liam, I would think would know what that is, but when you are building
> > your own kernels, and the next version you build doesn't work, you backup
> > to an older version that does work, then apply half of the patches in the
> > same sequence as they were applied to get from one that works to one that
> > doesn't to build an intermediate kernel & see if it works, if not, next
> > pass only applies 1/4 of the patches, or if it does work, apply 1/4 of the
> > remaining patches. In 8 or maybe 9 such builds you can nail it down to
> > the specific patch that broke it. Successive approximation, works well
> > for finding bad patches. Works well if you are following the -rc# as they
> > are released, but it does get cumbersome to find whu a 2.6.32 works, but a
> > 3.18 doesn't. That may take twice the builds.
> I don't build my own kernels, though, and haven't done this century.
> Sure, I used to in the mid-1990s, when you had to do that kind of
> fooling around, but things, as I keep telling you and you resolutely
> keep utterly ignoring, have moved on since then.
I've given up on trying to do this as whenever I ask a question on the
bug report or add information none of the, what would you call them,
those the bug is reported to, ever respond. The same goes for the bug
report I've added information to at freedesktop.org, no one seems to
care and questions I have don't get answered. There has to be a reason
for it as I'm not the only one having this issue as shown in the two bug
reports but no help is forthcoming.
31.11°N 97.89°W (Elev. 1092 ft)
09:38:10 up 2 days, 14:27, 1 user, load average: 0.18, 0.16, 0.21
Ubuntu 14.04.1 LTS, kernel 3.13.0-45-generic
More information about the ubuntu-users