quick setup

[J.R. Lillard]

is upgrading to 2.4 an option for me?  definitely.  i've primarily been 
running on 2.4 ever since i compiled it.  but i still can't get mol to 
work.  i temporarily reverted to 2.2 just to see if it would work where 
2.4 failed.

Greg Alexander wrote:
> Wouldn't surprise me that some 2.4-specific code has slipped in.  Most
> of the development work seems to be being done on 2.4, so I'm not sure
> how well-tested 2.2 support is currently.
> 
> Is upgrading to 2.4 an option?
> 
> GREG
> 
> "J.R. Lillard" wrote:
> 
>>right.  and i've tried all that.  compiling everything always results in
>>a seg fault that i posted about yesterday.  as far as i can tell,
>>however, my kernel is working fine.  i've always been dealing with mol
>>0.9.63.  and the kernel i've been compiling has been 2.4.18.  just for
>>kicks, i compiled 2.2.21 this morning.  mol wouldn't even compile
>>correctly.  it attempts to reference a function in the kernel headers
>>called get_zeroed_page.  i looked and there's no mention of
>>get_zeroed_page in the 2.2.21 kernel source anywhere.  so i'm guessing
>>it's new to the 2.4 kernel.  i never saw anything saying that mol
>>requires the 2.4 kernel though.
>>
>>regardless, the only time i've gotten mol to work was with a precompiled
>>2.4.18 kernel and a binary distribution of mol that matched.  and even
>>then the sheep_net module wouldn't load due to unresolved symbols
>>leaving me without networking.  compiling allows me to load the modules
>>without a problem, but like i said, mol just seg faults right away.  i
>>thought maybe there was a distribution out there with working mol
>>binaries i could try just to see it all work.
>>
>>since i actually saw things work once (without networking of course) i
>>have to think my setup on the mac side is okay.  i extracted a mac os
>>rom file from the os 9.2.2 updated.  this rom file is version 8.7 and is
>>not listed on the compatibility list on the mol website.  is it possible
>>that there's something in the rom file causing the crash?  i've still
>>got the 9.2.1 installer.  i might try it with that rom instead since
>>it's actually listed on the compatibility chart as working.
>>
>>Greg Alexander wrote:
>>
>>>"J.R. Lillard" wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>i've been trying to get mol working on a beige g3 running debian for a
>>>>couple weeks now with no success.  i'm desparately wanting to get this
>>>>working and i'm willing to do whatever it takes at this point.  i'll
>>>>even switch to a different linux distribution.  i'm not tied to debian
>>>>for any reason.  i just found that it was easy to install.  can anyone
>>>>out there recommend a simple, quick way to get mol going with as little
>>>>manual intervention as possible?  network installations of linux are
>>>>preferable but as long as i don't *have* to install from a cd it should
>>>>be okay.
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>J.R.
>>>
>>>
>>>My understanding:
>>>
>>>1.) Download Kernel Sources.
>>>2.) Download MOL Sources.
>>>3.) Compile all of the above.
>>>4.) Reboot w/ new kernel.
>>>5.) Install MOL.
>>>6.) Run MOL.
>>>
>>>MOL doesn't rely on much more than your kernel version, so changing
>>>distributions shouldn't make much difference.
>>>
>>>GREG
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>mol-general mailing list
>>>mol-general@lists.maconlinux.org
>>>http://lists.maconlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/mol-general
>>
>>--
>>J.R.
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>mol-general mailing list
>>mol-general@lists.maconlinux.org
>>http://lists.maconlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/mol-general
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mol-general mailing list
> mol-general@lists.maconlinux.org
> http://lists.maconlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/mol-general


-- 
J.R.