[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: boot floppies problem during installation



On Donnerstag, 8. Mai 2003 15:19, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> #include <hallo.h>
> * Ralf Nolden [Wed, May 07 2003, 11:40:56PM]:
> Content-Description: signed data
>
> > > According to Ralf Noden, USB is compiled into the kernel.
> >
> > Well, I originally *assumed* that would be the problem - I just could see
> > that the hanging process is rmmod - which brought me to the quick
> > assumption that the module can't be removed (and is therefore compiled
> > in). But I'm
>
> I cannot reproduce this. And even if I could, file a bug against
> modutils. Rmmod should exit immediately if the module is not loaded.
>
> > apparently wrong - if you load the module with hotplug then you'll
> > naturally also unload it again. So it seems the bug is in the kernel
> > module.
>
> Module? Which module?
>
> > OTOH, I don't know where the exact difference in the code is between the
> > 2.4.20-bf2.4 kernel and the kernel-image-2.4.20-1-i386 (your one Herbert
> > from unstable; I backported it to woody). As kernel-image-2.4.20-1-i386
> > works perfectly well with hotplug, the question is rather what the
> > difference in the USB setup is. The best idea is probably to build bf2.4
> > from the kernel-image-2.4.20-1-i386, no ?
>
> Huch? That are different binary packages built from different source
> packages but both using same source from the kernel-source packages.
> The difference is in the config and a small patch, iirc.

Ok, I tested the installation with regard to modutils. Using the version in 
woody (2.4.15-1) works but the version in unstable (2.4.21-2) triggers the 
hang in rmmod.

Ralf
>
> MfG,
> Eduard.

-- 
We're not a company, we just produce better code at less costs.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Ralf Nolden
nolden@kde.org

The K Desktop Environment       The KDevelop Project
http://www.kde.org              http://www.kdevelop.org

Attachment: pgpJwZDqU6WuI.pgp
Description: signature


Reply to: