Archiso w/ specific kernel version

All,
I'd like to build an archiso to create install media which includes ZFS. build.sh fails, because ZFS requires older kernel version than the current.
How can I specify a kernel version for archiso and for the new install?
Thanks for your help in advance,
Janos

This might help:
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Ar … ck_Machine

Similar Messages

Why does external modules not depend on a specific kernel version ?

Hi,
I'm quite new to Archlinux and there are a few things I don't understand about the way pacman handles kernel and modules packages.
I understand that modules in the repository are only build against the current kernel version and that you should update both at the same time to keep your system in a working state, however I don't understand why the package system does not enforce that.
For example if I look at the current nvidia modules (100.14.19-3), it will install its stuff in lib/modules/2.6.23-ARCH and hence (should) depends on kernel26>=2.6.23.
However if I take a look at the package itself, it only depends on kernel26.
If I upgrade the modules without upgrading the kernel or upgrade the kernel without upgrading the modules, I will break my system.
In my opinion (but I may be missing something) the package manager should be robust and should make sure your system stay in a coherent state.
Is there a technical reason for this or is this only to avoid having to modify the packages dependencies each time a new kernel is release ?

Very interesting, I was right when I said I was probably missing something
As I said in my first post, I'm a new archlinux user. I'm more familiar with debian/ubuntu systems.
The way they are solving this kind of issue is simply by putting the kernel version number in the package name.
For example you have nvidia-kernel-2.6.23-1 which depends on linux-image-2.6.23-1.
This solves these kind of upgrade issues (I did a search in the forums before creating this thread and I saw there were a hell lot of kernel/modules dependency issues that have already been reported by other users).
The advantage of this system is that you can keep both the old and the new kernel package on your system at the same time are revert to the previous version if something goes wrong.
However the drawback is that you have to maintain several versions of the same package in the repository at the same time, which may be contrary to the archlinux philosophy...

Ipw2x00 depends on multiple kernel versions?

Why doesn't ipw2200-0.12-1 depend on kernel version 2.6.8.1 and ipw2200-0.12-2 on 2.6.9-ARCH only? I mean, those packages contain kernel modules for only 1 kernel version.
A couple of minutes ago I noticed that pacman -Syu wanted to upgrade ipw2200 only. This was an upgrade for linux 2.6.9, but that kernel has not been uploaded to my mirror yet. I use the same mirror for current and extra. If I had upgraded, my WiFi would of course be broken, because it wouldn't be able to find the proper modules.
Imo packages that contain kernel modules for one kernel only should explicitely depend on that version. It would even be better if pacman could uname -r the running kernel and install the modules for that kernel (assuming those kernel modules do not REALLY depend on one specific kernel version).
Btw I also cannot build ipw2200 manually. There seems to be something broken.
ERROR: ipw2200-fw-2.0.tgz was not found in the build directory and is not aproper URL.

yeah, also kernel updates will "break" it,
lets face it, human brain beats package management systems in this case because it should violate every kiss principle on the market,
Disclaimer: If this post doesn't make any sence just ignore it.

Kernel version for my sp levels

Hello,
I am running SAP server 6.40 on Solaris (64bit EX2 for Oracle) with 327 Kernel Version.
I have work processes that crash when executing a specific abap program.
As it may take time before sap dev support find the bug, I would like to test
with an old kernel (319) on my DEV system.
I would like to ensure that my support packages can run with the 319 Kernel.
Where could I find the minimum version of kernel needed by a support package level?
Thanks in advance for your answer.

>
Sunil Bujade wrote:
> Yes, Work process should not core dump.
> Now you have two options,
> 1) Upgrade kernel 327
> 2) Raise a OSS message with SAP.
Hello,
The OSS message has been opened last week.
The other options are also to downgrade as we suspect that it is a new bug.
This is why I have posted my original question.
Do I have a way to find out if it is ok to run HR 5.00/SP 79 with Kernel 327?
Another option is to upgrage only the dispatcher & work process as I can get a version above 347:
dw_355-10004725.sar
But I am not very familiar with these upgrades.
Can I use dw_355 with my 327 other binaries?
See you,

Kernel: AVVideoCard::probe: This driver is not compatible with model MacBookPro5,5 when running kernel version 11.0.0. Loading will abort.

Hi
Since my update I am getting the following message in my console:
11-07-22 3:27:45.000 PM kernel: AVVideoCard::probe: This driver is not compatible with model <MacBookPro5,5> when running kernel version 11.0.0. Loading will abort.
Anyone know what this means and the solution?
Thank you

Me too. The specific message on my 13' MBP is:
12/5/11 11:06:32.539 AM usbmuxd: _AMDeviceConnectByAddressAndPort (thread 0x100781000): IPv4
12/5/11 11:06:33.000 AM kernel: AVVideoCard::probe()
12/5/11 11:06:33.000 AM kernel: AVVideoCard::probe: This driver is not compatible with model <MacBookPro5,5> when running kernel version 11.2.0. Loading will abort.

[SOLVED] update zfs fails due kernel version

$ uname -v
#1 SMP PREEMPT Sun Jun 8 10:08:38 CEST 2014
and
$ sudo pacman -Syu
:: Synchronising package databases...
core is up to date
extra is up to date
community is up to date
demz-repo-core is up to date
demz-repo-archiso is up to date
:: Starting full system upgrade...
resolving dependencies...
looking for inter-conflicts...
error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies)
:: spl-git: requires linux=3.14.6-1
:: zfs-git: requires linux=3.14.6-1
As I have the required kernel version, I'm puzzled why pacman couldn't do the update.
Please enlighten me.
Last edited by theking2 (2014-06-22 07:54:43)

@Xi0N
With spl{,-utils} and zfs{,-utils}, upgrading leads to circular dependencies. This can be worked around by always building the packages in a chroot, but it is a bit more work than a normal module add on from the AUR.
But while demizer's repo is super duper convenient, he is human and doesn't always get to updating the packages as soon as the new kernel drops to [core]. So from time to time, you will have to patiently wait for the unofficial repo to be updated before you can update the linux package. That said, I am pretty sure he versions the dependency on the linux package, so I don't think that you can install the new linux package and then end up with a non-working filesystem. Rather, the attempt to upgrade the linux package will fail due to unmet dependencies.
Edit: As a disclaimer, it has been a while since I have played with zfs. So while I think this information is accurate, things may or may not have changed.
Last edited by WonderWoofy (2014-06-26 23:27:17)

Automatic upgrade of AUR packages dependent on kernel version.

I have an issue with upgrading AUR packages with pacaur. When I try to upgrade with one of the following commands:
pacaur -u [package_name]
pacaur -Su -a
pacaur -Syu
I keep getting the error 'no results found for dependencies)'
Here an example output:
[ ~ ]$ pacaur -Syu
:: Synchronizing package databases...
core is up to date
extra is up to date
community is up to date
:: Starting full system upgrade...
resolving dependencies...
looking for conflicting packages...
error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies)
:: spl-git: requires linux=3.17.6-1
:: zfs-git: requires linux=3.17.6-1
:: Starting AUR upgrade...
:: resolving dependencies...
:: no results found for dependencies)
As seen in this example, the system upgrade is failed due to two kernel packages which require the previous kernel version.
I wonder, does the AUR upgrade fails after the failed system upgrade because of new spl-git and zfs-git packages require the new kernel version? And the message ":: no results found for dependencies)" is caused by this?
It seems there is a kind of a circular dependency in this case - kernel doesn't upgrade because of zfs requires the older kernel, and zfs doesn't upgrade because the new version of zfs requires the new kernel.
Previously I upgraded AUR packages manually, by first removing them, then upgrading the kernel and after that installing new versions of packages.
Is it possible to automatically upgrade kernel packages? If so can this be done with pacaur?
Last edited by nbd (2015-01-19 23:39:49)

Hi, so I'm not the only newbie doing such things.
here:
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=181717
ukhippo wrote:Afterwards I also suggest using “pacman -Syyu” to update (note the double “y”, this forces a refresh of all packages)
meaning first add the repository and the key for demz-repo-core https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Un … -repo-core.
I did that today but the output was just:
[root@machine1 ~]# pacman -Syyu
:: Synchronizing package databases...
core 121.6 KiB 599K/s 00:00 [########################################################] 100%
extra 1806.6 KiB 671K/s 00:03 [########################################################] 100%
community 2.5 MiB 672K/s 00:04 [########################################################] 100%
multilib 121.2 KiB 932K/s 00:00 [########################################################] 100%
demz-repo-archiso 5.5 KiB 37.9K/s 00:00 [########################################################] 100%
demz-repo-archiso.sig 287.0 B 0.00B/s 00:00 [########################################################] 100%
demz-repo-core 7.8 KiB 48.6K/s 00:00 [########################################################] 100%
demz-repo-core.sig 287.0 B 0.00B/s 00:00 [########################################################] 100%
:: Starting full system upgrade...
resolving dependencies...
looking for conflicting packages...
error: failed to prepare transaction (could not satisfy dependencies)
:: spl-git: requires linux=3.17.6-1
:: zfs-git: requires linux=3.17.6-1
even though I read
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/?sor … =&flagged=
x86_64 Core linux 3.18.2-2 The Linux kernel and modules 2015-01-15 2015-01-16
and
https://github.com/demizer/archzfs
spl-git Update git packages for kernel 3.18.2-2 4 days ago
zfs-git Update git packages for kernel 3.18.2-2 4 days ago
I don't really know if I want to remove the package first, while running the machine from a zfs filesystem.
If it runs automatically the chance of me making an error is a little smaller, don't really want to have a not bootable system.

Add kernel version tags or date info

Hi All,
A thought about our wiki, now it's been going a few years.
There are articles which span various versions of the kernel, and versions of X. There are good reasons not to get rid of historical information, because it helps people learn the progression of the distribution over time.
When keeping historical information (or just not updating old pages) becomes a problem is that there is no search filter for 'new -> old' or 'by date'.
If we put kernel version, X(11/org) version, or date info as a set of tags like we currently do with 'desktop', 'laptop' etc., then that could be included as a search filter to weed out old responses or to target a solution for a specific software version.
It would be excellent if Google did this - but they don't. We could lead the way in information mining for a linux distro!
It shouldn't be much work to add new categories for kernel version. But tag info for specific versions of EVERY version of EVERY package seems ike it could get very messy very quickly.
How difficult would a 'new -> old' update or creation date filter be for search results?

The wiki has a history feature; isn't that what it's for? I agree that we should keep support for slightly older packages in the wiki for a while (like xorg-server 1.6 for example, as many people didn't upgrade for fear of compatibility issues). But large amounts of history in the article itself seems redundant since you can get that info from the page's changelog.

Relation between R3 kernel version 640 and 4.6B, C D

Hi,
What is the relation between R3 Kernel 640 version and SAP 4.6B, C, D versions. Based on R3 kernel version how to identify the sap version e.g. 4.6B, C D etc.
Thanks.
Anirudh,

Hello Anirudh,
Every SAP release will have its own set of kernel releases
SAP Kernel 7.00 is valid for ECC 6.0.
SAP kernel 640 is actually valid from SAP R/3 Enterprise 4.7. it is also valid for ECC 5.0
For 4.6 C kernel release 46D is available.
For 4.6B SAP Kernel 4.6B and 4.6 C are available.
For 4.6A 4.6A,4.6B and 4.6C are available.
This is what is available in marketplace however I have heard about something called downward compatability of kernels which means lower releases can have higher kernels.
You must always go for the highest available kernel patch.
However kernel is OS bit size specific
Regards.
Ruchit.

Calling a .py script inside a .VI, using anaconda's Libraries or specific python version (SystemExec.vi(?), MAC OSX)

Hi,
I'm new to both mac and LabView, so it may well be something obvious I'm missing.
I'm trying to use System Exec (http://zone.ni.com/reference/en-XX/help/371361L-01/glang/system_exec/ with LabVIEW 2014 on Mac OS X Mavericks) to call a python script to do some image processing after taking some data and saving images via LabView.
My problem is that I cannot figure out how to point it to the correct version/install of python to use, as it seems to use the pre-installed 2.7.5 apple version no matter whether that's set to be my default or not (and hence, it can't see my SciPy, PIL etc. packages that come with my Anaconda install).
It doesn't seem to matter whether I have certain packages installed for 2.7 accessable via the terminal, the LabView System Exec command line can't seem to find them either way and throws up an error if a script is called that imports them.
I've tried changing the working directory to the relevant anaconda/bin folder, I've also tried
cd /Applications/anaconda/bin; python <file.py>
as the CL input to system exec, but it's not wanting to use anything other than the apple install. I've tried Anaconda installs with both python 2.7 and 3.4, so it doesn't seem to be down to the 3.* compatibility issues alone.
Printing the python version to a string indicator box in LV via python script gives the following:
2.7.5 (default, Mar 9 2014, 22:15:05)
[GCC 4.2.1 Compatible Apple LLVM 5.0 (clang-500.0.68)]
Whereas via the terminal, the default version is the anaconda install I'd like to use, currently
Python 3.4.1 |Anaconda 2.1.0 (x86_64)| (default, Sep 10 2014, 17:24:09)
[GCC 4.2.1 (Apple Inc. build 5577)] on darwin
I can do which python3.4 on the sys exec CL input to get the correct /anaconda/bin location, but if I try python3.4 <file.py>, I just get a Seg fault.
I've found examples for System Exec use and instructions for calling python scripts with specific versions, but neither works with Mac (frustratingly).
I've also tried editing the Path Environment Variable, and tried getting rid of the python 2.7 install entirely, but none of these work either (the latter just causing errors all over the shop).
So, in summary
I'd just like to know how to specify the python version LabView uses and to have use of the corresponding python libraries.
Either python version (2 or 3) will do, I'd just like to be able to use my libraries which came with Anaconda which I'll be writing my scripts with (which I installed as the correct packages are only compatible with a specific python version on Mac, which is not the specific version that Xcode was compatible with, argh).
All packages work normally when using the Anaconda version with the terminal or with Spyder.
Is there a function I can use other than System Exec? What am I missing?
Please help.

janedoe777 wrote:
Accidental. Also, that's not terribly helpful.
What exactly does that mean?
I'm not debating whether it was accidental or intentional. It certainly isn't helpful to post the same message twice.
It is helpful to point out this message is a duplicate so people don't waste their time answering this one if you are already being helped in the other one.

I wand to install Windows 7 on my band new Macbook Pro 13 inch. Do I need to buy a specific Mac version of Windows 7 or do I install a standard Windows 7 OS on the Mac

I want to install Windows 7 on my band new Macbook Pro 13 inch and use Parallel Desktop 6 torun it alongside my Mac OS. Do I need to buy a specific Mac version of Windows 7 or do I install a standard Windows 7 OS on the Mac using boot camp.

As vazandrew said, Boot Camp will work with any standard copy of Win 7.
The only exception would be if you want to run it in a virtual environment, such as with Parallels or WMware.
I personally recommend Boot Camp, however, since it only uses the resources for one OS at a time.

When attempting to set up Mac OS to open a specific app (version), and selecting 'Change All' on Get Info, it reverts to most latest app version of the same. Any clues?

When attempting to set up Mac OS to open files with a specific app (version), through 'Change All' on Get Info, it reverts to most latest version of the same app. Any reason why it does not allow my other version of same app to be the default one?

I have Acrobat Pro 10.1.13 and Adobe Reader 10.1.13.
If I use the Finder to get all PDFS to open with Reader instead of Pro, they do. And vice versa, using the Change All.

QUERIES ON KERNEL VERSION UPDATES

can any one comment on this.
Uprade current kernel from RHAS 2.4.9-e.25enterprise to RHAS 2.4.9-e.49enterprise or 2.4.9-e.49enterprise
We need answers to the following questions:
1. What are the requirements/impact in Oracle RAC when RHEL AS 2.1 version 2.4.9-e.25enterprise (current) is upgraded to e.49?
2. How come a 3 node RAC cannot be composed of machines with different kernel
versions? (option is to have the 2 node with previous kernel and 1 node with
the new kernel for testing)
3. What are some known issues in kernel e.49?
4. Has there been installation of Oracle for e.49? Is Oracle tested for this
kernel version?
5. Is it safe for our current version of Oracle Apps (11.5.8) & Dbase (9.2.0.5)
& OCFS (1.0.11) to upgrade to the latest kernel which is kernel e.59?
6. If kernel is upgraded to e.49 or e.59 , is OCFS required to be upgraded also
from our current version of 1.0.11?
7. Are there other Oracle modules/components that will be affected if
enterprise kernel is upgraded from e.25. to e.49 or e.59?
Any help is greatly appreciated.
thanks,
venkat.

Hi Ram,
Interestingly I found this link googling your name! Well, I hope you would had already found answers for your posting (They look outdated). I am not oracle geek but I guess
(In reply to your 7th question: Are there other Oracle modules/components that will be affected if enterprise kernel is upgraded from e.25. to e.49 or e.59?) I donât think a layered component (like oracle DB) will have any effect because of kernel upgrade [Again, I not a oracle geek so I may be wrong!]
I wish U good luck!
Your cousin!
Vikram Andem

What is the latest kernel version for OL6

Hi,
After a yum update, this is what I got:
2.6.32-300.39.1.el6uek.x86_64
I am using a SSD and it seems (based on en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIM) that
support for ATA TRIM was added in 2.6.33.
My question is what is the latest kernel version for OL6?
Thanks,
Zhe

alwu wrote:
My question is what is the latest kernel version for OL6?2.6.39-300.17.2 (which is actually 3.0.17 under the hood) is available in the ol6_x86_64_UEK_latest channel. You will need to modify your ULN channel subscription or which channels are enabled from public-yum.oracle.com to install this kernel.
Edited by: Avi Miller on Dec 6, 2012 10:41 AM

What is the Current ABAP Kernel version for SAP ERP 6 (ECC6)..?

What is the Current ABAP Kernel version for SAP ERP 6 (ECC6)..?

Hi,
Login to http://service.sap.com/swdc using your S user-id
Serach for kernel
Check for your relevent kernel patch (unicode/non-unicode , NW release etc.)
Regards,
Rajneesh

Archiso w/ specific kernel version

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for