Bilbo wrote:
[quota problem snipped]
> So now I'll go ahead and make user accounts without quota's
> for the moment. But I sure hope you guys can give me some
> inspiration.

seems to me your problem is the fact that that 11th patch file did not
apply properly. that's the problem you should fix.

--
Joost Kremers
since when is vi an editor? a discussion on vi belongs in
comp.tools.unusable or something...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Joost Kremers <joostkremers@yahoo.com> is thought to have typed
the following text on Thu, 14 Aug 2003 at 14:47 GMT:

<snipped something usefull to the OP>

Welcome back.

- --
Bartosz Oudekerk

Play Rogue, visit exotic locations, meet strange creatures
and kill them.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/O6/a256ZyNYAOpkRAldWAJ41rkGlQFa6pesb12ZbYUm+WlCptACeL gqp
jkznmYrljyFO4MYVKqjB3Dw=
=n01I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Joost Kremers wrote:
> [quota problem snipped]

Bienvenidos, Senor Joost!
--
/dev/rob0 - preferred_email=i$((28*28+28))@softhome.net
or put "not-spam" or "/dev/rob0" in Subject header to reply

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article <slrnbjn7lm.2d1.joostkremers@j.kremers4.news.arnhe m.chello.nl>, Joost Kremers wrote:

First of all welcome back....

>
> seems to me your problem is the fact that that 11th patch file did not
> apply properly. that's the problem you should fix.
>

Don't I know it tried to avoid that one by trying to go back to a
previous version.

The "good" option would be fixing the patch file.

The "easy" one...... trying yet an older version of quota?


Oh well.... will have a look at patch 11

- --
The rain it raineth on the just
And also on the unjust fella,
But chiefly on the just, because
The unjust steals the just's umbrella.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/O7f4qV1uRRMUN/wRAsRPAJ0fFMvO8ZTwJggQPlzZp72hnpmVtgCfckac
hYaUchvmM+u2SHCdGtWSSzQ=
=GsWt
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article <slrnbjn7lm.2d1.joostkremers@j.kremers4.news.arnhe m.chello.nl>, Joost Kremers wrote:
> seems to me your problem is the fact that that 11th patch file did not
> apply properly. that's the problem you should fix.

Ok.... lets see if I understand this patching business

The reject file has the following info:
***************
*** 345,351 ****

lock_kernel();
sync_inodes(dev);
- - DQUOT_SYNC(dev);
sync_supers(dev);
unlock_kernel();

- --- 345,351 ----

lock_kernel();
sync_inodes(dev);
+ DQUOT_SYNC_DEV(dev);
sync_supers(dev);
unlock_kernel();

The diff file section responsible says:

@@ -345,7 +345,7 @@

lock_kernel();
sync_inodes(dev);
- - DQUOT_SYNC(dev);
+ DQUOT_SYNC_DEV(dev);
sync_supers(dev);
unlock_kernel();

I understand this as follows:

In a source block starting at line 345 the line with DQUOT_SYNC(dev);
should be replaced by DQUOT_SYNC_DEV(dev);
So in the source file the line with lock_kernel(); should be on line
number 345

But when I look in the kernel source (/usr/src/linux/fs/buffer.c) that
line is on line number 348.

So to fix the diff file I should change the line

@@ -345,7 +345,7 @@

to

@@ -348,7 +348,7 @@

Right?
- --
The wages of sin are high but you get your money's worth.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/O/jDqV1uRRMUN/wRAg6TAJwLcI+p5SFn5h0vQMJNvX0nf+FRwACdHsW8
RNfWqfx1n8KnxZfaIMX++dQ=
=COLP
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Bilbo wrote:
> In article <slrnbjn7lm.2d1.joostkremers@j.kremers4.news.arnhe m.chello.nl>, Joost Kremers wrote:
>> seems to me your problem is the fact that that 11th patch file did not
>> apply properly. that's the problem you should fix.
>
> Ok.... lets see if I understand this patching business
[snip patch file exx]
> I understand this as follows:
>
> In a source block starting at line 345 the line with DQUOT_SYNC(dev);
> should be replaced by DQUOT_SYNC_DEV(dev);
> So in the source file the line with lock_kernel(); should be on line
> number 345

AFAIK you understand correctly.

> But when I look in the kernel source (/usr/src/linux/fs/buffer.c) that
> line is on line number 348.

that's a bummer...

> So to fix the diff file I should change the line
>
> @@ -345,7 +345,7 @@
>
> to
>
> @@ -348,7 +348,7 @@
>
> Right?

well, i don't fully understand the codes that diff generates, so this may
or may not work. but no doubt all the other patches in the same file will
also be off somewhat. most likely, the problem you have is that the source
file you're trying to apply the patch to is not identical to the soucre
file against which it was created. you should make absolutely sure you have
the correct version, and if you do, perhaps contact the person who created
it, they may have made a mistake. (but i doubt that, so check and check
again... ;-)

--
Joost Kremers
since when is vi an editor? a discussion on vi belongs in
comp.tools.unusable or something...

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, Aug 14, 2003 at 06:25:28PM +0200, Bilbo wrote:

> First of all welcome back....

mee too

> > seems to me your problem is the fact that that 11th patch file did not
> > apply properly. that's the problem you should fix.

> Oh well.... will have a look at patch 11

i'm not quite sure about what i'm about to write now...
but are you using the kernel source that comes with slackware 9 or
not ?

if so, i seem to remember that there are just a couple of tiny
security related patches applied to that one. this may be the reason
why your pach won't apply.

try to apply the patches to the very same kernel version source that
you get from ftp.kernel.org (or... your favorite mirror

i never used quotas myself, so i can't be of any specific help on
that subject


Jurgen.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/PFG31ucXIiwNwbURAgjzAKDBqdeUC3MxuDCaUyd/sWOGQdljRQCfXYAx
h9L5unDS9m0378UF9jQhCgo=
=+kag
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 09:15:12AM +0200, Bilbo wrote:

> I'll have a go at "fixing" patch 11 first, don't really want to loose
> something Pat thought to be important enough to include.

or upgrade to 2.4.21
and see if there's a patch for that one you can apply.

it might save you some troubles.


Jurgen.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/PJCA1ucXIiwNwbURAs48AJ4+Zcps3Sm6K/ZIkSkowNIJSPgfUQCfXb67
4mLAKJovXC1ubov5UIdCPMA=
=S95/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

In article <20030815074924.GB2403@anubis.earthlink.net>, Jurgen Philippaerts wrote:
> or upgrade to 2.4.21
> and see if there's a patch for that one you can apply.

What I ended up doing was applying the patch, which would again reject a
certain portion, and edit the file in question by hand.

The make bzImage ran quite nice, am now waiting for the modules
(which takes forever on the target system)

Will inform

- --
$100 invested at 7% interest for 100 years will become $100,000, at
which time it will be worth absolutely nothing.
-- Lazarus Long, "Time Enough for Love"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/PNqXdLi+tUDFQJcRAmCnAJwIjWxYNqlILEmBzWbrKvgb+9hxSw CeNs57
cBc5TCE4axwV6qjp7hLyvrw=
=9rZh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, Aug 15, 2003 at 04:39:39PM +0200, Bilbo wrote:

> After some further study it turned out the problem was with the username
> format which - for the first time - we had chosen; completely numeric
>
> Like in: 030776

uhm... that the first time i see someone implementing this
maybe rethingk that one and prefix them with a department or
something.


Jurgen.

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE/PatB1ucXIiwNwbURAtXLAJ0cW0qHiiridyt+HTyHUt77XYh9BQ CghlNP
k8ai5INFpPUSvQTe5q9yvnI=
=DIji
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----