Re: modules not found after kernel recompile
On Mon, 26 Jul 2004 10:42:37 -0600, "CW Harris"
<charris@rtcmarketing.com> said:
> On Mon, Jul 26, 2004 at 12:15:29PM +0200, Inge Thorin Eidsæther wrote:
> >
> > Hi guys, and thanks for all your help so far!
> >
.....
> > - Modules are found in correct location,that is:
> > /lib/modules/2.6.71, which corresponds to the output
> > of 'uname -r'
>
> Is this a typo? or are you using kernel 2.6.7 with an append-to-version
> of 1? I would recommend you use "-" (hyphen) before numeric
> append-to-version so the kernel version does not look wrong (i.e. there
> is no kernel 2.6.71).
That would be correct. I put EXTRAVERSION=1 in the top-level Makefile.
So that 2.6.7 becomes 2.6.71. But, as you observed, it makes no
difference in this matter.
> What are the first errors you get and the text above them?
I don't get any errors, aside from the ones mentioned about
'FATAL: module <something> not found'. Not anymore, since I
renamed /etc/modules to /etc/modules.old and that one's empty.
If I probe for nonexisting modules, the old FATAL msg. appears.
Nothing strange about that, though.
UPDATE:
Tried running 'modprobe <module name>', where 'module name' is one
of the module names in /lib/modules/2.6.71. Seems to work, but is this
a permanent solution? A reboot will of course tell me if it's not...
> > Does things really have to be this convoluted?
>
> Maybe it helps to remember with W*nd*ws you wouldn't even have the
> choice to compile your own kernel, or try the latest and greatest from
> the developers.
It could be argued that the process of adding a device driver to a
W*nd*ws box and having it reboot in order to reconfigure the win32
kernel is not that unlike a recompilation from the non-technical
user's point of view. Sure, that's an overly simplistic way of
looking at it, since a kernel recompile is not just about adding
support for new hardware, but...
I dislike MS and W*nd*ws for a number of reasons, but installing a
driver
for a piece of hardware was *usually* not that troublesome in W*nd*ws.
(Although I've had my share of problems as a technical consultant.)
As for 'lates and greatest' software, well, if it's broken,
it won't do much good. Seen that on more than one occasion with Linux.
Then again, I've found much useful software under Linux, sometimes
even in a pretty early state of development, so there you go.
Still, I'm sticking to Linux (particularly Debian) because of the
positive things: GPL licensed, open-source, non-proprietary,
standards-compliant, et cetera.
It' will require more from me as a user, but I'm a stubborn b*st*rd.
> Sorry I'm not more help -- I'm not up-to-date with the latest versions
> of things, and unfortunately I can't bring my play-around computer down
> right now to see what has changed.
Some help is better than none. Sometimes all that's needed
is a push in the right direction. Thanks anyway!
best regards,
Inge Thorin Eidsæther
blackwings NOSPAM at NOSPAM inbox dot com
Reply to: