Re: modutils and module-init-tools duplicating work

From: Micha Feigin (michafeigin_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 08/31/03

  • Next message: Bijan Soleymani: "Re: Mozilla and Print" 
    To: debian-user <debian-user@lists.debian.org>
Date: Sun, 31 Aug 2003 22:07:34 +0300

    On Sun, 2003-08-31 at 20:59, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
    > --- Micha Feigin <michafeigin@yahoo.com> escribió:
    > > > modultils -- kernel < 2.5.48
    > > > module-init-tools -- kernel >= 2.5.48
    > > >
    > > > Of course, module if module-init-tools finds an earlier kernel, it passes
    > > the
    > > > work on to the old version.
    > > >
    > >
    > > They are still almost the same, except for the check whether to run
    > > depmod in module-init-tools. Why do we need two of them?
    > >
    >
    > Because, as of kernel 2.5.48 the kernel modules now end in .ko and have a
    > completely different internal structure. The new module-init-tools does not
    > handle old style modules, but recognizes and passes them on to modutils.
    > The old modutils knows nothing of the new formats and will barf all over itself
    > if you attempt to build, load, remove, or otherwise operate on a module with
    > it.
    >
    > The short answer is: because they are not cross compatible.
    >

    I'm afraid that you are just speculating and didn't bother to actually
    read the code. Just for the fun of it I just commented out the line that
    checks for kernel version 2.5.48 and up, i.e.
    # [ -f /proc/modules -a ! -f /proc/ksyms ] || exit 0
    and fixed a cosmetic bug with the echo that prints what module is
    loading:
    echo " $module"
    instead of
    echo " $module\t"
    either the \t is not needed, or its supposed to be echo -e and probably
    a \n
    I then tried it out on 2.4 and 2.6 and it works like a charm on both, no
    barfing or anything. Will most probably also work with 2.2 kernel. The
    only difference between them (except for cosmetic ones) is the check
    whether to run depmod. I'm aware of the .ko extension and the only place
    it appears is when checking whether to run depmod, and .o is also
    checked in that instance.
    Having both of them is most certainly redundant which translate into a
    bug.

    > -Roberto
    >
    > ___________________________________________________
    > Yahoo! Messenger - Nueva versión GRATIS
    > Super Webcam, voz, caritas animadas, y más...
    > http://messenger.yahoo.es
    > 

    -- 
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-request@lists.debian.org 
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
  • Next message: Bijan Soleymani: "Re: Mozilla and Print"

    Relevant Pages

    • Re: modutils and module-init-tools duplicating work
      ... and fixed a cosmetic bug with the echo that prints what module is ... Will most probably also work with 2.2 kernel. ... it appears is when checking whether to run depmod, ...
      (Debian-User)
    • Re: whats the processing sequence for initramfs during boot?
      ... the intricacies of the boot sequence regarding how the kernel ... where is that echo output going so i can see it? ... mknod /dev/null c 1 3 ... insmod /lib/ehci-hcd.ko ...
      (Fedora)
    • Kernel Panic + Intel SATA
      ... I have a IBM ThinkPad t43 running Fedora Core Linux 4 and kernel ... Mounting root filesystem ... Partition 1 does not end on cylinder boundary. ... echo Mounted /proc filesystem ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: high system cpu load during intense disk i/o
      ... The kernel config has many standard things disabled so the oprofile output now seems very different. ... Everything is responsive and the CPU is 99% iowait as it should. ... PIII, speed 798.02 MHz ...
      (Linux-Kernel)
    • Re: [PATCH 1/3] exporting capability code/name pairs (try #3)
      ... and so I can see why folk might want it in the kernel ... capabilities from an optional /etc/XXX file - and make text visibility ... I think optional configuration file is not a good idea. ... +echo '#ifndef CAP_NAMES_H' ...
      (Linux-Kernel)