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

Re: Power Management et. al.



Ethan Benson wrote:

> i was going to look at this again to see what i could come up with.
> one really tricky problem is it seems you often MUST recompile the mol
> modules against the exact kernel source of the running kernel.
> otherwise they don't work.
> 
> on my system when i upgraded to 2.2.19 and force load the 2.2.18 mol
> modules mol bitches that the kernel patches don't match mol or
> somesuch rubbish.  i think this happened from 2.2.17 -> 2.2.18 as
> well.

In the 0.9.57 announcement they talk about less dependency on the kernel -
wonder if that will help for these issues? They say 'it might be necessary to
recompile MOL from the source in certain cases' for 2.4 kernels...


> my idea is to take the module sources from mol and put them in thier
> own package, say mol-modules-src or something.  this package should
> depend on kernel-headers and would allow the user to build just the
> modules against thier running kernel.
> 
> i am not sure if this would work though, if i get bored agian i may
> mess with it.

If the new version doesn't fix it, I think this would be a good idea.


> one other thing i have found, it seems that non-root users cannot run
> mol for the first time, even with a setuid patcher, since AFAICT its
> the wrapper shell script that loads the modules, this of course fails
> if your not root.   an ugly solution to this is add a initscript to
> run the patcher and then install the mol modules...  but then again
> allowing non-root users to run mol may be a huge security hole anyway.

You mean MacOS is the security hole? :)


-- 
Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)    \   Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer
CS student, Free Software enthusiast   \        XFree86 and DRI project member



Reply to: