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

Re: newbie question.




On Thu, 13 Apr 2000, Sunil Pandey wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 13, 2000 at 01:45:00PM +0200, Robert Varga wrote:
> | 
> | Have you compiled a new kernel or you are using the kernel provided with
> | the installation? If you are using the kernel with the installation, then
> | put a line containing rtl8139 into /etc/modules.conf.
> | Also make sure that the the rtl8139.o file can be found in the appropriate
> | directory under /lib/modules . It should be found in
> | /lib/modules/<kernelversion>/net 
> 
>        I am using the kernel with the installation ie 2.0.38 and I did
> all that u had suggested. I put an entry in /etc/modules and also got
> the file rtl8139.c . now, however, I am getting a shady problem. how do

The debian cd should contain the rtl8139.o file. It should install it, if
you select the rtl8139 module during the kernel module configuration phase
of the installing. If you want to reconfigure the installed modules of the
installation, you need to start from install the base system menu item.

> I compile it?? I can't find any cc/gcc on my comp and if I compile it on
> other comps, running redhat, I get version mismatch.
> 

You need to install it as mentioned previously.

> btw, do I need to do "insmod rtl8139"?
> also, what is the 'auto' entry in /etc/modules and why is it commented
> by default?
> 

In /etc/modules if auto is given, then it loads any further necessary
modules on its own. It should be the last uncommented not empty line in
/etc/modules. All modules loaded by auto are subject to automatic module
removal if they are not needed. Specifically given modules are not
unloaded automatically.

If rtl8139 is given in /etc/modules, then it is loaded upon bootup and not
upon request by the system, and is not subject to autoremoval. 

You need insmod rtl8139 only if neither auto nor rtl8139 is given
/etc/modules.

If you cannot find rtl8139.o then I can send you one compiled for 2.0.36
or 2.2.13. 

Robert Varga


Reply to: