Aaron Griffin wrote: > On 2/13/06, matthew g <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> I find the ndiswrapper package is a pain in the ass if your not using >> a stock kernel. Like I won't use a stock kernel because I just have a >> ton of strange bugs. Like when using the arch stock my sound is also >> screwed up. Using my own compiled version (some kernel version) >> everything works just fine. >> > > Well, that's to be expected, as with any module package. Part of the > reason I split the ndiswrapper package into ndiswrapper and > ndiswrapper-bin was to allow users to install multiple ndiswrapper > modules side-by-side. The original plan was to provide an > ndiswrapper-archck in [community]. Feel free to simply re-makepkg > when installing a non-stock kernel. > > On 2/13/06, Derek Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> And, unfortunately I can't reinstall perl until ndiswrapper is built. >> >> Sort of a catch 22, eh? Is there a way to kludge the perl versions so >> that ndiswrapper can be recompiled? >> > > Heh, sounds like a pain - there's a bug with perl upgrades on > occasion, and I'm pretty sure it's a combination of upstream + the way > arch installs packages. I think it's one of those unfixable things. > How did you get this version of perl to begin with? If it was from > the install CD, you can always mount that and reinstall from there. > Also, it should be cached in /var/lib/pacman somewhere. > > Try one of those. > _______________________________________________ > arch mailing list > [email protected] > http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch > > Hi Aaron,
This system was installed from the CD several months ago. The testing repository is enabled. I usually "pacman -Syu" once per week. I noticed recently that the kernel was moving from testing to current. I rebuilt ndiswrapper at that point just because of the problems I've described. That was about two weeks ago to the best of my old memory. Yesterday I upgraded once again, and ended up having to reboot. This is when I discovered the problem. I could try to install from the cache (don't recall if I tried that or not). One thing that's wierd about the Makefile is that it was reporting @INC against a particular version 5.8.8. Wouldn't it make sense to refer to the "current" link instead? Of course I don't really know how all of these things are linked together. Thx for taking a minute to consider my problem. _______________________________________________ arch mailing list [email protected] http://www.archlinux.org/mailman/listinfo/arch
