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

Re: Something wrong with potato modutils



That question has to do with module paths. That isn't the problem. I
compile the kernel, everything is fine, no errors reported. Then either
manually install it or compile it with make-kpkg, makes no difference, and
when I depmod -a the new modules, I get unresolved symbols in every
module. This started for me on Friday night. 

I just noticed a libc and ldso upgrade today so I will try it again and
see if things are ok now.



On Mon, 25 Oct 1999, Art Lemasters wrote:

>      On a most recent upgrade, I noticed that there was a question posed
> by the system on modutils, along with a prompt to say no or hit "enter."
> ...sorry, but although I remember there was a notice about involved
> config files being replaced, I did not jot it down.  I chose "enter,"
> to make the changes (to delete the obsolete config file(s)).
> 
> Art
> 
> On Mon, Oct 25, 1999 at 01:36:18AM -0700, George Bonser wrote:
> > 
> > Well, I THINK it is modutils that is causing the problem. Two machines,
> > both upgraded yesterday. Now neither one can properly depmod. All modules
> > report unresolved symbols and refuse to load. 
> > 
> > NOTE this only affects kernel compiled after the upgrade so it could be a
> > libc or ldso issue, not sure what changed in the past few days.
> > 
> > Old kernels that were working before the upgrade still work. Kernels built
> > after the upgrade are broken. 
> > 
> > 
> > George Bonser
> > 
> > "When someone annoys you, it takes 32 muscles to frown, but it only
> > takes 4 muscles to extend your arm and smack them in the head."
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe debian-user-request@lists.debian.org < /dev/null
> 
> 
> -- 
> Unsubscribe?  mail -s unsubscribe debian-user-request@lists.debian.org < /dev/null
> 
> 
> 

George Bonser

"When someone annoys you, it takes 32 muscles to frown, but it only
takes 4 muscles to extend your arm and smack them in the head."



Reply to: