Very Computer

by **Eric Potte** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

> When I initially installed RH 6.1 from a cheapbytes.com CD, I did not
> install the development packages due to limited disk space. Afterwards I
> decided to build a new kernel, so individually installed packages such
> as gcc, as86, make, development libs, etc.

> The problem I'm running into is that when using the command
> "make menuconfig" the configuration menu never appears -- make
> just sits there spinning its wheels (no diagnostic messages), for hours
> if it's left alone, and I wind up having to abort it.

> I'm assuming there is some package needed by menuconfig to work that is
> still missing. Anyone know what might that be? (BTW, if I generate a
> .config file using menuconfig on another system and copy it over, the
> kernel does build with no problems. I'd still like to get menuconfig
> working on this sucker, though.)

'make menuconfig' uses ncurses, I believe.
How about 'make config' or 'make xconfig'? Do they work?

by **Dave Bro** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

>When I initially installed RH 6.1 from a cheapbytes.com CD, I
>did not install the development packages due to limited disk space.
>Afterwards I decided to build a new kernel, so individually installed
>packages such as gcc, as86, make, development libs, etc.

>The problem I'm running into is that when using the command
>"make menuconfig" the configuration menu never appears -- make
>just sits there spinning its wheels (no diagnostic messages),
>for hours if it's left alone, and I wind up having to abort it.

>I'm assuming there is some package needed by menuconfig to work
>that is still missing. Anyone know what might that be? (BTW, if
>I generate a .config file using menuconfig on another system and
>copy it over, the kernel does build with no problems. I'd still
>like to get menuconfig working on this sucker, though.)

>--
> Roger Blake
> (remove second "g" and second "m" from address for email)

I've encountered this. If you install the "ncurses-devel" package,
you usually pick up the piece that make menuconfig needs. (However,
I've also encountered a machine that that didn't help.)

Usually, even though make menuconfig is broken, you can still use
make xconfig. And I don't think there's any way to break make config.
--
Dave Brown Austin, TX

by **Michael Kell** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

>>'make menuconfig' uses ncurses, I believe.

>Thanks, I'll try installing that package.

>>How about 'make config' or 'make xconfig'? Do they work?

>Haven't tried 'em -- "make config" is a bit too klutzy for my taste,
>and 'make xconfig' is not an option since I'm not running X. (The
>system is an old 486 with limited memory and disk space.)

How limited is it Roger? I ask because it ran okay on my
486/50 with 16 MB ram and about 20 MB swap. Also,
at least on the Slackware dist. I had, make menuconfig
never did diddley. I'd make all the selections, save 'em,
and then the configuration was exactly the same. I had
to do the make config to get it to work. On this newer
machine and dist. I have used make xconfig and it's
much nicer. Saves a lot of time, and the config changes
seemed to "take".

Might have just been bad scripts on the slackware96
I was using, but you might be surprised that X may
run on your machine. At least it's good for graphical
editing and web browsing.

Enjoy. :)

Mike

--

"I don't want to belong to any club that would have me as a member."
-- Groucho Marx

by **Michael Kel** » Sun, 31 Dec 1899 09:00:00

Quote:
> I finally gave up on menuconfig and just did a "make config" -- that
> was a pain to plod through but it did work OK, and the kernel built
> and booted with no errors.

I just went through it doing the 2.3.4 kernel and there's way more
options now than the 2.0.27, the last custom kernel I did. Oh well,
at least on this machine the build is a hell of a lot faster!

Quote:
>>I was using, but you might be surprised that X may
>>run on your machine. At least it's good for graphical

> I'm pretty much a command-line bigot, I regard the main use for X as
> running multiple xterms. :-)

Yeah, I like to have both myself. In Win9x/NT I like to have Zoom Shell
for unix-like commands and aliases in a GUI window. It's pretty neat.
I know what you mean though. I come from Dos cli and if you know exactly
what you want to do cli is way faster. Sometimes the mouse is good 'cause
it slows you down. Gives you a chance to think and not work too fast. ;)

--

Mike
--
"I don't want to belong to any club that would have *me* as a member!"
-- Groucho Marx

Very Computer

"make menuconfig" hangs on RH 6.1

"make menuconfig" hangs on RH 6.1

"make menuconfig" hangs on RH 6.1

"make menuconfig" hangs on RH 6.1

"make menuconfig" hangs on RH 6.1