--- In "dawydiuk" <> wrote:
> If I misunderstood the problem/fix then please correct me. But to my
> understanding the problem was not that the source code and config file
> needed to be modified, it was the Linux distro being used had a newer
> version of glibc which previously had not been used/tested and
> resulted in uncovering a bug.
>
> Please let me know if you feel the source code we are distributing is
> not up to date and I can do a diff against our CVS to check this...
Actually, it turned out that the problem was that when I reported
the build error, I was told that either I'd made a local configuration
error (when I did nothing except what I was told to do on a CLEAN
x86 linux install) or that I had some other problem on my end.
Being told that I might need to change my configuration settings
in order to avoid compiling the program that needed a patch was
what set me to wondering what else might have been wrong or
missing in the delivered source code.
If I had been told by Technologic which linux distro they knew the
build worked on, then I would have used it and none of this thread
would have been written. But I had to discover that on my own
because the person who had been helping me either didn't care to
look at the bug (or the patch to it) to find out why I had a problem
building the code he delivered.
> <Rant>
> It's kind of interesting how you can easily spot the negative
> individuals on this list. It's as if they must post something negative
criticizing someone regardless if there is any truth behind it or not.
> A word of advice, the world is not conspiring against you. People
> aren't out to get you, relax and remember the old saying.
>
> "You'll catch more bees with honey than vinegar"
> </Rant>
I'm sorry I get negative, but others might, too, if they follow the
instructions their given as precisely as possible and, when they
fail, are told that they cause the problem themselves. Most folks
asking for help understand they might have a role in the problem,
and they might even be able to fix it with enough accurate
information.
I did what I was told EXACTLY, but with regard to building the
TS-7800 kernel sources, I was only told:
"Install/Extract both on a Linux x86 box"
when it might have been useful to let me know what Linux was
suggested and/or that newer versions of linux cause a known
issue with your sources. If the issue wasn't known until I
reported it, the guy I was talking to should probably have
thanked me, let me know that it was because of a change to
the structure of the kernel sources since your package was
assembled, and added a note to your kernel source's README
to let people who download it from now on know about the
issue in case they encounter it.
Instead, he told me that Technologic has many customers
compiling successfully, so I must be messing up.
How would you feel? Be honest?
------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ts-7000/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ts-7000/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|