Re: 2.4.17 kernel & pcmcia problem
Brian Mays wrote:
> > I just checked to refresh my memory on the problem that you are
> > discussing. If you are using the 2.4 kernel drivers, then you do
> > not need to install (or even build) a pcmcia-modules-2.4.18 package.
> > This is the package that had the conflicts with the kernel-image
> > package. Since you do not need to install it, you should not
> > encounter this problem again.
> > The contents of the pcmcia-cs package should not have conflicted
> > with anything. Therefore, this is not a problem with pcmcia-cs.
Heather <email@example.com> replied:
> When the names of modules that are used by some -cards- changed
> between 2.2 and 2.4, and (gasp) if they're different between David
> Hind's external modules or Linus' internal ones, then yes, it
> certainly -is- going to bother pcmcia-cs. The config file will
> announce incorrect mappings.
> Beep, bonk. :(
This is a problem, but it is not the specific problem that Tom was talking
about. He was referring to the conflict between the symlinks in the
/lib/modules/<k>/pcmcia directory of the current kernel-image-* packages
and the files in the same directory of the pcmcia-modules-* package. This
is the correct location for the standalone drivers, and the symlinks are
not necessary. Therefore, this is a problem with the kernel-image-*
packages, and it has nothing to do with pcmcia-cs.
> ... Not that I'm afraid of a little text editing but it needs to be made
> AWARE and do the right thing without hand hackery, so folks' laptops
> will "just work" when they change Debian kernel kits or even (per
> common wisdom) build their own. Even if it's just a debconf saying,
> which of 3 config layouts should I use?
Try version 3.1.31-7. The only "hand hackery" that should be necessary is
to deal with problem with specific special-case cards or laptops.
Examples of these special cases can be found in /usr/share/doc/pcmcia-cs/co