Quoting Anders Ellenshøj Andersen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > On Thursday 26 December 2002 17:20, Kurt Sys wrote: > > > OK... problem found, I guess: > > > > # Can't locate module iirc > > Sorry I should have know better than to be that imprecise. iirc is just > shorthand for if I remember correctly. Using the regular kernel its just > > # modprobe smb >
OK... I'm sorry I didn't no that expression... I'll never forget it. But euh, smb is installed, as a module. And I installed several smb-packages too. It's just, I can read server-data if i use xsmbrowser, but mounting seems not to work... Is this 'normal'? > > I'm quite sure it isn't, mainly because I'm not sure which one I have > > to choose. I know it's SoundBlaster and Windows sound compatible (from > > website of Dell). However, if i try to 'modconf' the '100% soundblaster > > compatible' modules, it fails... I have this on my laptop, but actually > > Yeah.. That's not gonna work, I think. > > > also on my desktop (so it is not really a laptop-specific problem for > > me, although i have much more information about my soundcard of my > > desktop, i.e. i/o, irq, ...). > > I tried also with the OSS-stuff, but if i run alsaconf then, it > > complains 'can't locate module snd'. Do i really miss another module? > > (And where can i find it...) > > ALSA stands for Advanced Linux Sound Architechture. It's the next generation > sound api that is going into kernel 2.6 (hopefully). There is no alsa support > in the stock kernel sources from debian, so unless you get an alsa patch for > 2.4 from somewhere on the net, nothing that has anything to do with alsa is > ever going to work. Forget alsa until you get regular sound working. OK... I'll remember this too. It's just, many people advise me to use alsa. > Try compiling the kernel with the Intel sound driver (Intel ICH (i8xx), SiS > 7012, etc. etc.). If you compile it directly into the kernel it should be > activated at reboot. I'll try this, later on, but I think I already tried some of these. Does make a difference if i include as a module, or directlly into the kernel? I read sometimes that it's 'better' to compile the things as modules, but i have not really an idea why... Anyway, it's worth the effort. By the way, I always try to get things to work as root first. If that's working, I change permissions... I think this isn't really an issue here (since root has the right permissions), is it? tnx, Kurt.
