This is part of The Pile, a partial archive of some open source mailing lists and newsgroups.
Subject: Re: help! module question From: Rob Napier <rnapier@employees.org> Date: Mon, 3 May 1999 17:25:38 -0400 On Wed, Apr 28, 1999 at 09:38:15PM -0400, Holden MacRoyn wrote: > > I compiled my kernel, modularizing everything that I could safely get away > with. According to RedHat's recommendations for setting up the new kernel, > I did the following: > > 1. Copied the new kernel to /boot and made a symlink to it > 2. Copied the new System.map and made a symlink to it > 3. made an initial ramdisk using mkramdisk in /boot > 4. configured LILO to use the new kernel > 5. ran lilo to establish the change in the MBR > > The ONLY thing that I have not seen in any of the documentation is where to > get the module file from. In /boot there is an old module-list-2.0.36-3 > that the old kernel used. Should I have one of these for my 2.5.5 kernel as > well? I looked through the module HOWTO, the kernel HOWTO, and anything > else related and nothing is mentioned. The new kernel seems to work fine > but when I try to run kernelcfg in X I get the error message 'can't find > /boot/module-info-2.2.5' > > What am I missing? Nothing. This is a hand-built file from Red Hat. If you need kernelcfg to work under 2.2.5, you'll just need to link /boot/module-info-2.2.5 to /boot/module-info-2.0.36-3. It'll be close enough. This is one of the great secrets of Red Hat 5.2. Luckily some of the guys from Red Hat come to our local LUG meetings, or I'd have never figured this one out. ====== Subject: Re: compile kernel: "make modules" reported "nothing to be done?" From: Mark Price <mepr@ilnk.com> Date: Sat, 05 Jun 1999 17:21:54 -0400 Zaigui Wang wrote: > > I compiled my new linux kernel (2.2.9) ok. But when I compiled the sound > modules, I spotted some message like "nothing to be done on modules." This might be a little too simple, but have you tried touch *.c before compiling the sound modules? That usually works for me when I get a message like that. If all the certain if the .o and the .c files or the .o .c and .h files have the same time-stamp, make doesn't know that anything need to be done. === Subject: Re: System.map .. (and Reverend strikes again) From: John Summerfield <summer@OS2.ami.com.au> Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 23:30:26 +0800 > >From: "Walter B Kulecz, PhD" <wally@wahine.jsc.nasa.gov> > >To: redhat-list@redhat.com > >Subject: Reverend's expertise strikes again. > > > > response from Reverend to Jack Byers: > > >You should always copy the System.map to /boot after the compile. >It's > >created by the make process. > > > It basically maps everything out on your system. > > >You should NEVER mismatch System.map and kernel image > versions. > > >I certainly can't explain the purpose of System.map but this advice > is > >not right. > > As I stated in my original question, > my experience is like that of Walter Kulecz, > ie that the mismatch of the version number > of System.map- in /boot compared to the > version number of the vmlinuz does not > ever seem to cause a problem. > So it doesn't _seem_ necessary upon recompiles of the kernel > to copy the updated System.map to the /boot. > I have had one private response from one other respondent > saying the same thing. > The system map is a table of all the symbolic addresses in the kernel. if it's not replaced at the time the kernel installed, the table will have incorrect addresses. If every your kernel splats itself all over your console, you will need the current system map to be able to report the occurrence usefully. Flying without an up-to-date system.map is like being without backup: one day you're likely to be bitten. === Subject: Re: System.map .. (and Reverend strikes again) From: John Summerfield <summer@OS2.ami.com.au> Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 23:34:32 +0800 > It's a shame that several people on this list seem to be quite abusive / > dismissive to others offering advice - specially when they have no better > advice / experience to offer themselves. > > Reverend's advice makes sense to me... and in doing a little further Reverend said you don't need a current version. This is quite wrong: it must correctly represent the running kernel. Go grepping and reading you kernel source tree for more info, find /usr/src/linux -type f -exec grep -i system.map {} m \; | less === Subject: Re: System.map From: Kayvan Aghaiepour Sylvan <kayvan@sylvan.com> Date: Sat, 29 May 1999 20:58:06 -0700 (PDT) The System.map file is used by klogd to give somewhat human-readable kernel messages if there is a kernel OOPS or other kernel error. If your System.map is outdated with respect to your running kernel, it just means that you won't get much useful information for debugging a kernel crash. === Subject: Re: System.map -- where documented? From: "Jose M. Sanchez" <opjose@ex-pressnet.com> Date: Sun, 30 May 1999 00:38:23 -0400 > Brian> On a similar note, how do I generate a modules-info file? This > Brian> doesn't seem to be in the kernel source tree. A copy is put in > Brian> /boot but it only seems to work with the stock RH 6 kernel. No, it's not part of the kernel sources... This is strictly a RH "thing" used by the kernelcfg part of the control-panel. It is generated by Red Hat... HOW is the big question.... Some argue that Redhat does this by hand... I maintain that they have an automated system to do this, as they'd be silly not to... === Subject: Re: module-info and misc kernel stuff From: Jan Carlson <janc@iname.com> Date: Wed, 09 Jun 1999 13:20:31 -0400 David Yates wrote: > > I don't know why I am letting this bother me; everything seems to be working > fine. > I have upgraded to kernel 2.2.9 and I have some questions: > My System.map is in / and I have a symlink in /boot pointing to it. > My vmlinuz file is in / and lilo.conf is set to image=/vmlinuz > Is this ok? No. They belong in /boot. > and I also do not have a module-info file for 2.2.9, nor one pointing to it > although I do still have module-info file for my old stock precompiled rpm > based rhl kernel (2.2.5-15) > Am I supposed to have a module-info file for 2.2.9? > thanks in advance. No, module-info only comes with the binary kernel rpms from Red Hat. ===