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

Re: sshfs?



On Tue, 9 May 2006 20:24:07 +0200
Florian Kulzer <florian@molphys.leidenuniv.nl> wrote:

> Try installing the "module-assistant" package; then run (as root)
> 
> module-assistant a-i fuse 
> 
> (I don't use Sarge, therefore I am not 100% certain if it will work like
>  that, but "fuse-source" exists in Stable, so I would expect that the
>  module assistant can build the module for you.)
Sorry to bother you, however I got attracted by the posibility to use sshfs
and tried to set up it for myself. All went fine until I got to the point
which kernel-headers I should install

module-assistant suggested

  "install the package kernel-headers-2.4.27-1-386"

however, `aptitude search kernel-headers' showed that there is no such
one in the Stable.

  uname -a
said
  2.4.27-1-386

And the candidates showen by `aptitude search' are

  p   kernel-headers-2.4.27-2         - Header files related to Linux kernel versi
  p   kernel-headers-2.4.27-2-386     - Linux 2.4.27 kernel headers for 386       
  p   kernel-headers-2.4.27-2-586tsc  - Linux 2.4.27 kernel headers for Pentium-Cl
  p   kernel-headers-2.4.27-2-686     - Linux 2.4.27 kernel headers for PPro/Celer
  p   kernel-headers-2.4.27-2-686-smp - Linux 2.4.27 kernel headers for PPro/Celer
  p   kernel-headers-2.4.27-3         - Header files related to Linux kernel versi
  p   kernel-headers-2.4.27-3-386     - Linux 2.4.27 kernel headers for 386       
  p   kernel-headers-2.4.27-3-586tsc  - Linux 2.4.27 kernel headers for Pentium-Cl
  p   kernel-headers-2.4.27-3-686     - Linux 2.4.27 kernel headers for PPro/Celer
  p   kernel-headers-2.4.27-3-686-smp - Linux 2.4.27 kernel headers for PPro/Celer
  p   kernel-headers-2.4.27-speakup   - Header files related to Linux kernel versi

Being not an expert at all it's hard for me to be sure which one I
should use.  If I use `kernel-headers-2.4.27-2', very likely that it
will be installed not in /lib/modules/2.4.27-1-386/ where all my
modules are. Could you please clarify this point?

-- 
Vladimir Zolotykh



Reply to: