> However, in my defense, I have to point out a problem with the patches...
>
> THEY'RE NOT CORRECT
They are.
> The method I'm using to apply the patches is as follows:
>
> 1. uncompress and untar the original unaltered source into a directory.
> 2. cd into said directory
> 3. patch -p2 < patch_file > results
Use patch -p1; the file after the +++ is the filename that
will always succeed, the --- filename has a dir extra and
might not always work (because it might not exist yet as
the file concerned is a new file).
Alternatively, use the script /usr/src/linux/scripts/patch-kernel,
which will automatically upgrade your kernel for you :-)
> 4. examine results
>
> Now, I'm willing to admit that I might be doing something wrong. However,
> if you expect to get the average user to trust using patches to upgrade
> their kernel, then it is imperative that the patches apply completely and
> without any errors when applied over an unaltered version of the source.
The biggest problem with average users is that they don't read the
documentation.
Maybe it's time for a Documentation/UPGRADE file explaining why
people should use patches, how they can (safely) use them and
that they should keep their sources clean before patching stuff :-)
Rik.
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Linux memory management tour guide. H.H.vanRiel@phys.uu.nl |
| Scouting Vries cubscout leader. http://www.phys.uu.nl/~riel/ |
+-------------------------------------------------------------------+
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu
Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html