> Why can't you make a fast 2.2.19 with _just_ safe bug fixes (as the fixing
> of these module problems certainly is)?
Shall I do a 2.2 release for every trivia. I think not.
There is plenty to get into 2.2.19 already
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
> In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> from "Keith Owens" at Dec 14, 2000 0
> ***9:05:13 AM
> > previously because nobody used those options. Since these are bugs in
> > the modules and only a few modules are affected (less than 5 reported),
> > the fix is to
Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
In-Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] from "Keith Owens" at Dec 14, 2000 0
***9:05:13 AM
previously because nobody used those options. Since these are bugs in
the modules and only a few modules are affected (less than 5 reported),
the fix is to correct the
Why can't you make a fast 2.2.19 with _just_ safe bug fixes (as the fixing
of these module problems certainly is)?
Shall I do a 2.2 release for every trivia. I think not.
There is plenty to get into 2.2.19 already
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the
> Well, if it is going to take that long to fix 2.2 ... modutils 2.3.23
It may do. 2.2.18 took a long time.
> will make this a semi-warning. modules with invalid MODULE_PARM for
> options that are not used will load, but the module will not support
> persistent data. If somebody actually
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 22:13:29 + (GMT),
Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> previously because nobody used those options. Since these are bugs in
>> the modules and only a few modules are affected (less than 5 reported),
>> the fix is to correct the modules that have coding errors.
>
>That
> previously because nobody used those options. Since these are bugs in
> the modules and only a few modules are affected (less than 5 reported),
> the fix is to correct the modules that have coding errors.
That wont be happening in 2.2 until 2.2.19 which probably means 6 months.
If this is
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 21:10:54 + (GMT),
Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>It is modutils. Their behaviour changed in a non back compatible way. Do not
>use modutils 2.3.22 with Linux 2.2.* is the simple answer. Perhaps Keith can
>make this a warning in 2.3.23
Adding persistent module data
Alan Cox wrote:
>
> > > how can i make insmod load the network module again pls?
> >
> > I "fixed" the same problem in 2.2.18 by commenting out the line
> >
> > MODULE_PARM (debug, "i");
> >
> > near the end of drivers/net/8139too.c. Since I run modutils 2.3.22
> > as well, it can't be related
> > how can i make insmod load the network module again pls?
>
> I "fixed" the same problem in 2.2.18 by commenting out the line
>
> MODULE_PARM (debug, "i");
>
> near the end of drivers/net/8139too.c. Since I run modutils 2.3.22
> as well, it can't be related to the modutils.
It is modutils.
Christian Ullrich wrote:
>
> * Corisen schrieb am Donnerstag, 14.12.2000:
>
> > executing "insmod 8139too" at the command prompt shows the following error
> > message:
> > using /lib/modules/2.4.0-test12/kernel/drivers/net/8139too.o
> > /lib/modules/2.4.0-test12/kernel/drivers/net/8139too.o:
* Corisen schrieb am Donnerstag, 14.12.2000:
> executing "insmod 8139too" at the command prompt shows the following error
> message:
> using /lib/modules/2.4.0-test12/kernel/drivers/net/8139too.o
> /lib/modules/2.4.0-test12/kernel/drivers/net/8139too.o: symbol for
> parameter debug not found.
>
i've upgraded modutils from 2.3.14 (originally installed by RH7,kernel
2.2.16) to 2.3.22 using "rpm -Fvh modultils2.3.22-1.i386.rpm*" as required
by the kernel 2.4test12 compilation. after upgrading, the network module
refused to load anymore (was working fine with insmod 2.3.14) with kernel
i've upgraded modutils from 2.3.14 (originally installed by RH7,kernel
2.2.16) to 2.3.22 using "rpm -Fvh modultils2.3.22-1.i386.rpm*" as required
by the kernel 2.4test12 compilation. after upgrading, the network module
refused to load anymore (was working fine with insmod 2.3.14) with kernel
* Corisen schrieb am Donnerstag, 14.12.2000:
executing "insmod 8139too" at the command prompt shows the following error
message:
using /lib/modules/2.4.0-test12/kernel/drivers/net/8139too.o
/lib/modules/2.4.0-test12/kernel/drivers/net/8139too.o: symbol for
parameter debug not found.
how
Christian Ullrich wrote:
* Corisen schrieb am Donnerstag, 14.12.2000:
executing "insmod 8139too" at the command prompt shows the following error
message:
using /lib/modules/2.4.0-test12/kernel/drivers/net/8139too.o
/lib/modules/2.4.0-test12/kernel/drivers/net/8139too.o: symbol for
Alan Cox wrote:
how can i make insmod load the network module again pls?
I "fixed" the same problem in 2.2.18 by commenting out the line
MODULE_PARM (debug, "i");
near the end of drivers/net/8139too.c. Since I run modutils 2.3.22
as well, it can't be related to the modutils.
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 21:10:54 + (GMT),
Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It is modutils. Their behaviour changed in a non back compatible way. Do not
use modutils 2.3.22 with Linux 2.2.* is the simple answer. Perhaps Keith can
make this a warning in 2.3.23
Adding persistent module data to
previously because nobody used those options. Since these are bugs in
the modules and only a few modules are affected (less than 5 reported),
the fix is to correct the modules that have coding errors.
That wont be happening in 2.2 until 2.2.19 which probably means 6 months.
If this is your
On Wed, 13 Dec 2000 22:13:29 + (GMT),
Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
previously because nobody used those options. Since these are bugs in
the modules and only a few modules are affected (less than 5 reported),
the fix is to correct the modules that have coding errors.
That wont be
Well, if it is going to take that long to fix 2.2 ... modutils 2.3.23
It may do. 2.2.18 took a long time.
will make this a semi-warning. modules with invalid MODULE_PARM for
options that are not used will load, but the module will not support
persistent data. If somebody actually tries
21 matches
Mail list logo
