Return to BSD News archive
Received: by minnie.vk1xwt.ampr.org with NNTP id AA5509 ; Fri, 01 Jan 93 01:47:37 EST Path: sserve!manuel.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!spool.mu.edu!olivea!uunet!haven.umd.edu!umd5!roissy.umd.edu!mark From: mark@roissy.umd.edu (Mark Sienkiewicz) Newsgroups: comp.unix.bsd Subject: Re: [386bsd] Kernel build dies, unref symbol _version Message-ID: <17701@umd5.umd.edu> Date: 23 Dec 92 16:22:02 GMT References: <1992Dec19.170735.25368@nwnexus.WA.COM> <21250004@hpuamsa.neth.hp.com> <BznK64.AGL@NeoSoft.com> Sender: news@umd5.umd.edu Organization: University of Maryland Lines: 26 In article <BznK64.AGL@NeoSoft.com> karl@NeoSoft.com (Karl Lehenbauer) writes: >>"init_main.o: something about an unreferenced symbol _version" >>is there a standard fix for this? > >Yeah, ATFP. Add The Fine Patchkit. This problem is fixed by patch #1. > If you look in the ls-lR file from agate.berkeley.edu (which appears to be the primary ftp site for 386bsd), you will find a directory that looks like this: pub/386BSD/386bsd-0.1/patches: total 0 Hmmmm... doesn't look promising... BUT if you look long enough, you may also find pub/386BSD/386bsd-0.1/unofficial/terry/beta.patch.kit: total 372 -rw-r--r-- 1 cgd 2172 Oct 5 11:33 README.1ST.Beta-1 -rw-r--r-- 1 cgd 8569 Oct 5 11:33 README.Beta-1 -rw-r--r-- 1 cgd 358400 Oct 5 11:33 patchkit-0.1.tar.Beta-1 Which _appears_ to be the patchkit that everybody is talking about. Can anyone confirm or deny that "unofficial/terry/beta.patch.kit" is the "official" patch kit?