Discuss

discuss@lists.centos.org

7 participants
34743 discussions

Kernel packages and 3rd party kernel modules
by Dag Wieers 27 Jun '04

27 Jun '04

Hi, I'd like to come back to this topic. We've discussed this before on IRC but there's still no acceptable solution implemented. 3rd party kernel-modules are build against the official Red Hat kernels, to make them work with the TaoLinux/CentOS kernels there are specific requirements: + kernel RPM package should provide the same version/release + kernel version/release should be the same for o /lib/modules/kernel-version-release o /boot/vmlinuz-version-release This means there's not much room for customization if you want 3rd party modules to work. You can have a different version in the RPM as long as the Red Hat version/release is also provided by the package and the kernel-files/directories have the exact version/release. To give you a better understanding of the pitfalls: | Installing a kernel-module, beware that I already do not require an | exact version for the kernel RPM package, because that has other | problems. Still I need to make sure I have an exact kernel and that's | why we use the vmlinuz file. [root@breeg root]# rpm -ihvU kernel-module-openswan-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL-2.1.2-1.1.el3.dag.i586.rpm error: Failed dependencies: /boot/vmlinuz-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL is needed by kernel-module-openswan-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL-2.1.2-1.1.el3.dag | Loading a module (I --nodeps installed the module), gives the following | warning. Beware that the module is placed in | /lib/modules/version-release which is different currently than the one | from TaoLinux. So people can't just do "modprobe ipsec": [root@breeg modules]# insmod /lib/modules/2.4.21-15.0.2.EL/kernel/net/openswan/ipsec.o Warning: kernel-module version mismatch 2.4.21-15.0.2.EL/kernel/net/openswan/ipsec.o was compiled for kernel version 2.4.21-15.0.2.EL while this kernel is version 2.4.21-15.TL2 Warning: loading 2.4.21-15.0.2.EL/kernel/net/openswan/ipsec.o will taint the kernel: forced load See http://www.tux.org/lkml/#export-tainted for information about tainted modules Module ipsec loaded, with warnings Although I can make it work like this, this is far from optimal and for other 3rd party kernel modules this isn't even guaranteed to work. PS I tried with a CentOS kernel, but I can't seem to find a i586 kernel on the website. -- dag wieers, dag(a)wieers.com, http://dag.wieers.com/ -- [Any errors in spelling, tact or fact are transmission errors]

1 0

can't find SDL_mixer
by scty Library 24 Jun '04

24 Jun '04

Hello all, I just installed SDL_mixer-1.2.4-9.rpm and I can see all the files in /usr/lib. I can also see them listed in ld.so.conf but when I run a .configure in supertux I get an error checking for Mix_OpenAudio in -lSDL_mixer... no configure: error: SDL_mixer library required what am I doing wrong. Any info or education is welcome. Thanks all Dominic Iadicicco P.S can't live without my Supertux :) __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out! http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

2 2

Re: nVIDIA solution
by Rick Graves 24 Jun '04

24 Jun '04

Hey SCTV Library, Good work! (Is that your real name?) > The problem was the AGP driver, Not the Nvidia driver. I was wondering if you could help me write an informative FAQ for this. Here is what I have so far: The Nforce2 driver is part of the kernel-unsupported package (which must be installed separately). Set the Option "NvAGP" to "1". This tells the kernel to load the agp module made by nvidia not the Generic Linux kernel which is AGPGART. (When and where do you set the NvAGP option to "1"?) Thanks, Rick

2 1

Re: Nvidia Drivers
by scty Library 23 Jun '04

23 Jun '04

Well, I figured it out all. The problem was the AGP driver, Not the Nvidia driver. When I set the Option "NvAGP" "1" it works fine. By setting this option to 1, it tells the kernel to load the agp module made by nvidia not the Generic Linux kernel which is AGPGART. Something else I discovered is that the AGPGART module isn't even loading when the kernel boots. For some reason the CentOS-3 installer won't install that module when I install the distro on a computer using an Nforce2 motherboard. It does installing it on my Home computer which is running an Nforce1 based motherboard. Well thats all folks, I just wanted to give all the solution I found. --- scty Library <sctylib2004(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > When I load the latest driver from Nvidia in > CentOS-3 > the logon screen turn light gray and I can't log in. > > Has anyone else had this problem? > > If so what did you do about it. > > If I use the driver that comes with CentOS I don't > have any problems. > > > > __________________________________ > Do you Yahoo!? > Yahoo! Mail - Helps protect you from nasty viruses. > http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail > __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Read only the mail you want - Yahoo! Mail SpamGuard. http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

2 1

Updated libpng package fixes security issue
by Lance Davis 23 Jun '04

23 Jun '04

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 There is an update to libpng for CentOS 3.1 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2004-249.html refers. Updated files are :- updates/i386/RPMS/libpng-1.2.2-24.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/libpng-devel-1.2.2-24.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/libpng10-1.0.13-14.i386.rpm updates/i386/RPMS/libpng10-devel-1.0.13-14.i386.rpm updates/i386/SRPMS/libpng-1.2.2-24.src.rpm updates/i386/SRPMSlibpng10-1.0.13-14.src.rpm These are available at http://mirror.centos.org/3.1/ and should be on all mirrors within a few hours. To update to the latest version 'yum update libpng libpng10' should be sufficient. Lance -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFA2L/0cEnkTQJeUTsRAg4bAJ9W4rBiMFvDqRB0G0kCy5UPAJTJ/wCfTGY5 SQblUInB727WJhwZ4D6Woy0= =Fm97 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- uklinux.net - The ISP of choice for the discerning Linux user.

1 0

Ethereal is cooking, thanks
by jack＠leadershipbynumbers.com 22 Jun '04

22 Jun '04

Just blanked on it. Thanks. It seems so obvious, as soon as Denis mentioned the gnome-ethereal package I realized what I had neglected. Jack(a)leadershipbynumbers.com http://LeadershipByNumbers.com

1 0

Getting Ethereal to work?
by jack＠leadershipbynumbers.com 22 Jun '04

22 Jun '04

I'd like to get Ethereal to run on CentOS 3x. Now, yum says everything is in place for ethereal, but I can't find any executable and am feeling real dumb. I've checked numerous forums (and the Red Hat site), but I can't find anything specific. I've used locate and find, but while there is a lot of ethereal material spread around on my CentOS 3 server, I'm missing the big piece to run it. Anyone point me in the right direction? Thanks, Jack Jack(a)leadershipbynumbers.com http://LeadershipByNumbers.com

2 1

Re: [Centos] rebuilding errata src rpms
by cweisiger＠i-55.com 21 Jun '04

21 Jun '04

Usually less than 24 hours but there is a libpng security update that hasnt been taken care of im guessing because its been 3 days since the posting on redhats site.. i have checked all the mirrors listed on the site (centOS) and yet to see the updated libpng rpm... i understand that kernel issues are some what different in being that it deals with pretty much the whole system..but... a libpng update is something rather small and could have been released already...i have rebuilt the src.rpm on a test server (using rpmbuild --rebuild src.rpm) but didnt know exactly if that was the proper way to rebuild the src rpms (if thats how the people at centOS do those) and didnt install it on my production server...and if it is that easy then i could just rebuild the src.rpms that dont need any spec file changes until i get a better understanding of what needs to be changed in those type of situations..and just wait for kernel updates from the people at centOS themselves to rebuild those(kernel updates) i am using up2date to keep my system updated with the necessary updates from the servers...could that be an issue or not? i have no problem rebuilding the src.rpms if how i do it is the proper and correct way to accomplish such a task..

1 0

rebuilding errata src rpms
by cweisiger＠i-55.com 21 Jun '04

21 Jun '04

I am running centos-3 and have a question about rebuilding errata srpms from redhat. Do all i have to do is run rpmbuild --rebuild filename.src.rpm to rebuild the rpm for use on my centos system? I am talking about the src.rpms that dont have a a filename change for example the rpm file name change for kernels, etc that add c0 to the rpm filename I am assuming that if the src.rpm filename from redhat errata page matches that of the rpm in centos that there were no .spec file changes and that i can run the above command to rebuild the rpm or any other src.rpm and then install the updated rpm on my system.

1 0

Updated kernel package fixes security vulnerability.
by Lance Davis 21 Jun '04

21 Jun '04

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 There is an updated kernel for CentOS-3.1 https://rhn.redhat.com/errata/RHSA-2004-255.html refers. Updated files are :- all in updates/i386/RPMS/ kernel-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL.c0.athlon.rpm kernel-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL.c0.i686.rpm kernel-BOOT-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL.c0.i386.rpm kernel-doc-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL.c0.i386.rpm kernel-hugemem-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL.c0.i686.rpm kernel-hugemem-unsupported-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL.c0.i686.rpm kernel-smp-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL.c0.athlon.rpm kernel-smp-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL.c0.i686.rpm kernel-smp-unsupported-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL.c0.athlon.rpm kernel-smp-unsupported-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL.c0.i686.rpm kernel-source-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL.c0.i386.rpm kernel-unsupported-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL.c0.athlon.rpm kernel-unsupported-2.4.21-15.0.2.EL.c0.i686.rpm These are available at http://mirror.centos.org/3.1/ and should be on all mirrors within a few hours. To update to the latest version 'yum update kernel' should be sufficient. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFA1sAWcEnkTQJeUTsRAlnjAKCQqkb3dWGjgPRed5V4IivlI+NTmACffcw8 kY1uTE5wmq6rTVPBxF7oU7U= =986u -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

1 0

Jump to page:

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Discuss