Re: Problem with module versioning in 2.4.0

2001-01-10 Thread Mike A. Harris
On Wed, 10 Jan 2001, Jeremy Huddleston wrote: O - K then. Nice sig. Too bad that it is at least as big as most spam mailings themselves. Instead of preventing spam, all you're doing is contributing to it. I just delete spam now as it is easiest most of the time. However fortunately, the below

Re: Problem with module versioning in 2.4.0

2001-01-10 Thread Keith Owens
On Thu, 11 Jan 2001 00:17:41 + (GMT), Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >jeremyhu wrote >> See below for my origional problem. It seems the problem lies in the >> module versioning option. > >Not quite Probably is. >> When the system boots, I am spammed with the following line: >> insmod

Re: Problem with module versioning in 2.4.0

2001-01-10 Thread Alan Cox
Ummm .sigs shouldnt be that long - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: Problem with module versioning in 2.4.0

2001-01-10 Thread Jeremy Huddleston
Well in any case, the problem was solved by my turning off module versioning. Regardless of how and why. All other things being equal (as in the .config I provided) CONFIG_MODVERSIONS=y produces the errors reported (PCMCIA not working, and unix.o not loading) and when it is not defined, everythi

Re: Problem with module versioning in 2.4.0

2001-01-10 Thread Alan Cox
> See below for my origional problem. It seems the problem lies in the > module versioning option. Not quite > When the system boots, I am spammed with the following line: > insmod: /lib/modules/2.4.0/kernel/net/unix/unix.o: insmod net-pf-1 > failed What happens is this kernel needs unix sock