Brian Mays wrote: > > I just checked to refresh my memory on the problem that you are > > discussing. If you are using the 2.4 kernel drivers, then you do > > not need to install (or even build) a pcmcia-modules-2.4.18 package. > > This is the package that had the conflicts with the kernel-image > > package. Since you do not need to install it, you should not > > encounter this problem again. > > > > The contents of the pcmcia-cs package should not have conflicted > > with anything. Therefore, this is not a problem with pcmcia-cs.
Heather <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> replied: > When the names of modules that are used by some -cards- changed > between 2.2 and 2.4, and (gasp) if they're different between David > Hind's external modules or Linus' internal ones, then yes, it > certainly -is- going to bother pcmcia-cs. The config file will > announce incorrect mappings. > Beep, bonk. :( This is a problem, but it is not the specific problem that Tom was talking about. He was referring to the conflict between the symlinks in the /lib/modules/<k>/pcmcia directory of the current kernel-image-* packages and the files in the same directory of the pcmcia-modules-* package. This is the correct location for the standalone drivers, and the symlinks are not necessary. Therefore, this is a problem with the kernel-image-* packages, and it has nothing to do with pcmcia-cs. > ... Not that I'm afraid of a little text editing but it needs to be made > AWARE and do the right thing without hand hackery, so folks' laptops > will "just work" when they change Debian kernel kits or even (per > common wisdom) build their own. Even if it's just a debconf saying, > which of 3 config layouts should I use? Try version 3.1.31-7. The only "hand hackery" that should be necessary is to deal with problem with specific special-case cards or laptops. Examples of these special cases can be found in /usr/share/doc/pcmcia-cs/co nfig.opts.gz. - Brian -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
