Re: Alpha and modules ? (fwd)
On Sep 12, Christopher C. Chimelis wrote:
> What do you mean? Do you mean upgrade TO some RedHat stuff or upgrade
> EXISTING RedHat stuff? I'm kinda confused (not a new experience for me,
> believe me).
Of course, I meant upgrading existing stuff, like binutils, modules,
> > Well, almost perfectly: some symbols
> > are not defined in ksyms.c and nfs does not start correctly when built
> > as a module.
> I've heard this. Supposedly, this will/has been fixed in the development
Anyway, adding symbols is easy. The only thing I haven't understood yet
is why modules which work on an i386 show unresolved symbols on Alpha
(strange because ksyms are mostly architecture independent).
> > However, the 2.0.x kernels need a patch to get rid of annoying
> > <sc347 (0,0,0)> messages. This patch is now part of Jay's
> > alpha-patches.
> I'll look at these too. Since I haven't had modules working yet, I'm
> clueless as to when those messages pop up.
It is not an issue for you if you're hacking the development kernels.
Of course, when I was talking about working modules, I meant, umm,
"stable" ones only.
TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to
Trouble? e-mail to email@example.com .