Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd.freebsd.misc Path: euryale.cc.adfa.oz.au!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!simtel!news.kei.com!news.mathworks.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uchinews!news From: Tim Pierce <twpierce@midway.uchicago.edu> Subject: Re: 2.0R base, 2.0.5 kernel? X-Nntp-Posting-Host: bio-5.bsd.uchicago.edu Message-ID: <DHBxE0.894@midway.uchicago.edu> Sender: Tim Pierce <twpierce@mail.bsd.uchicago.edu> X-Web: Mosaic, minus neat concept Organization: Direct Frontal Assaults on Bob Dornan References: <4749dp$j49@polo.iquest.com> Date: Tue, 31 Oct 1995 20:10:48 GMT Lines: 23 In article <4749dp$j49@polo.iquest.com>, Dougal Campbell <dougal@bacardi.gunters.org> wrote: >What are the ramifications of taking a kernel compiled from a 2.0.5 >installation, and installing it onto a box that was a 2.0R based install? I did this. Or, rather, I pulled down the 2.0.5 kernel source and compiled it on my 2.0R system. It boots. It runs. However, networking failed dismally. Route and routed changed significantly enough between releases that the 2.0R routing utilities cannot communicate with the 2.0.5 kernel. I believe I also tried to compile the 2.0.5 route, but was still unsuccessful in that. There may be other incompatibilities; I haven't come across many yet (though my system is, admittedly, pretty bare-bones). I plan to just do a full upgrade to 2.1 eventually. -- By sending unsolicited commercially-oriented e-mail to this address, the sender agrees to pay a $100 flat fee to the recipient for proofreading services.