Very Computer

I have been working on upgrading my system to kernel 2.1.108.  I'm now
running glibc 2.0.6 and 2.1.108, along with appropriate utility upgrades
(modutils 2.1.85, ld-so.1.9.9, etc.).  I'm apparently still missing
something, however, and can't find it in the linux kernel digests.

My system is still running depmod every time it boots.  When it does, it
gives me a whole slew of "unresolved symbols" messages.  It names every
module that I installed.  The modules also don't work.

I've ceased loading kerneld.  For the record, when I rebuilt modutils, it
complained about not being able to find "kerneld.h".  I found the old
kerneld.h from my 2.0.33 kernel and copied it over.  It ceased to complain
at that point.  It wouldn't surprise me if that was the source of my
problems, but I wasn't able to find kerneld.h anywhere else.

Needless to say, anything compiled as a module fails to work.

Any suggestions?

--
==========================================================================
"Why put fault tolerance in the OS, when it's already built into the User?"
        - Steve Shaw, comp.os.linux.advocacy, on the apparent lack of
          fault tolerance in MS Windows-series of OS's.

It's amazing what happens when one does a little further research.  In case
anyone has the same problem ...

I paged through the linux-kernel digests a bit further, and found a similar
problem.  The response suggested to run "make mrproper" prior to make dep,
make clean, etc.  Further, they suggested a problem with "make menuconfig".
Therefore, I configured my kernel using "make config".

After I did all that, everything compiled correctly and the modules
functioned properly.

I'm a bit humbled by this experience ... even though the documentation says
to do "make mrproper", I don't remember the last time I did it.  Surely not
for any 1.2.13 or 2.0.x kernels that I can remember.  I will surely do it
from now on.

--
==========================================================================
"Why put fault tolerance in the OS, when it's already built into the User?"
        - Steve Shaw, comp.os.linux.advocacy, on the apparent lack of
          fault tolerance in MS Windows-series of OS's.

:>I have been working on upgrading my system to kernel 2.1.108.  I'm now
:>running glibc 2.0.6 and 2.1.108, along with appropriate utility upgrades
:>(modutils 2.1.85, ld-so.1.9.9, etc.).  I'm apparently still missing
:>something, however, and can't find it in the linux kernel digests.
:>
:>My system is still running depmod every time it boots.  When it does, it
:>gives me a whole slew of "unresolved symbols" messages.  It names every
:>module that I installed.  The modules also don't work.

: It's amazing what happens when one does a little further research.  In case
: anyone has the same problem ...

["make mrproper" fix CHOMPed]

I've found [under 2.0.34, Slackware 3.5] that I need to
make menuconfig ; make clean ; make dep ; make zImage ; make modules ;
mv /etc/modules/2.0.34 /etc/modules/2.0.34.old ; make modules_install

This moves the old modules out of the /etc/modules/{kernelversion}
directory so that depmod doesn't try to check them and then
complain of missing symbols in the kernel.

Is this the correct way to do it, or no?

--
                                                --Sparty
web: http://upside.net/~sparty/

Quote:>["make mrproper" fix CHOMPed]

>I've found [under 2.0.34, Slackware 3.5] that I need to
>make menuconfig ; make clean ; make dep ; make zImage ; make modules ;
>mv /etc/modules/2.0.34 /etc/modules/2.0.34.old ; make modules_install

>This moves the old modules out of the /etc/modules/{kernelversion}
>directory so that depmod doesn't try to check them and then
>complain of missing symbols in the kernel.

>Is this the correct way to do it, or no?

That seems generally right.  In the linux-kernel-digest, someone suggested a
slick little fix for different kernel compiles and different modules.  I
don't remember it exactly, but it goes something like:

1] Compile the kernel, do the "make modules_install".  This will install
   the modules in their default place.
2] Make a directory under modules (/lib/modules) with the name you'll use
   for the kernel on bootup (linux-2.0.34, for example, so make dir
   /lib/modules/linux-2.0.34)
3] Move the modules from the default installation location to the new
   directory you just made.
4] In the sysinit scripts, run depmod with a command-line option which
   has the name of the label for the kernel you booted.  depmod will then
   look for the modules in /lib/modules/(label name).

As I said, I don't remember the exact details.  I can find them if you want.
But that was the basic outline.  It seemed pretty slick, so that you can
have multiple versions of the kernel, and multiple compilations, and not
have to worry about module conflicts.

Matt

--
==========================================================================
"Why put fault tolerance in the OS, when it's already built into the User?"
        - Steve Shaw, comp.os.linux.advocacy, on the apparent lack of
          fault tolerance in MS Windows-series of OS's.

        As an exercise I just tried compiling modutils-2.1.85 and got the same
complaint about kerneld, which is now obsolete and surplanted by kmod.
        I commented out the references to kerneld in Makefile and modutils.spec, it
then compiled fine. I don't use kmod myself, I use modprobe in my startup
scripts, but I know kmod works fine.
        I get the unresolved symbols on my machines, but all my modules work fine, so
there must be something in a script somewhere, I couldn't find it in 5 minutes
looking, so I moved on......... one lazy day perhaps I'll have a good look.
        See kmod.txt and modules.txt in /usr/src/linux/Documentation.
Regards
--
... Sid Boyce...Amdahl(Europe)...44-121 422 0375
                   -----------------------------------
Any opinions expressed above are mine and do not necessarily represent
 the opinions or policies of Amdahl Corporation.

Interesting.  I knew kmod wasn't working correctly with the symbol
complaints because anything I tried to do which would use modules didn't
work.

I continued to compile kerneld in case I switch back to an earlier kernel,
so that it doesn't matter whether kmod is in the kernel or not.

Thanks for the input though.  I'm glad to know that I'm not the only one who
had problems compiling kerneld.

--
==========================================================================
"Why put fault tolerance in the OS, when it's already built into the User?"
        - Steve Shaw, comp.os.linux.advocacy, on the apparent lack of
          fault tolerance in MS Windows-series of OS's.

One thing to remember is to remove the
old modules before installing the new
ones.

Caio                            |Oliver's Law: Experience is something you
N.Emile <DeR vInYl JuNkIe>      |  do not get until just after you need it.
/*Standard disclaimer in place*/|        Help Stamp out and Abolish
#include <disclaimer.h>         |         Redundancy and Repitition.