Re: debian 3.0r2: smbfs fails and module not present
From: Film (film_at_eleven.org)
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 12:03:24 -0500
Thank you for your reply!. (See other questions below:)
> It is that simple. You have to install a kernel image that has smbfs
> support, or compile on your own.
Wouldn't the default install be the vanilla package with smbfs support?
With smbfs selected in dselect I don't understand why that doesn't come up
as a dependency problem. Very confusing.
Also, I guess I thought the other kernels were considered unstable options
because if 2.4.x was OK for everything it would have been the default
install. This different kernels for different things is foreign to me.
> If you want to use kernel 2.2.20, install the vanilla package:
> apt-get install kernel-image-2.2.20
> That one has smbfs support:
> cat config-2.2.20 | grep SMB
> Or install one of the 2.4.18 packages:
> apt-get install kernel-image-2.4.18-1-386|586tsc|686|k6|k7
> depending on which architecture you use. If you want to use 2.4.18,
> don't forget to add a line to your bootloader configuration to make use
> of the initrd. And add security.debian.org to your sources.list, all
> the kernel packages in Woody that come with the CD sets or are on the
> official servers have security issues. Get the fixed packages from the
> security server.
I did install 2.4xxx on the clone test box I have. It didn't seem to make a
difference but then I'm not sure exactly what I installed. Maybe I
installed a 2.4x without smbfs support or do all 2.4x kernels have smbfs
I'm doing a new install on a Duron 1k box now so I'll try it there to see if
it works. I just selected to add 2.4.18-12.1 during the initial install
selection of dselect. If OK then I'll upgrade the existing Pentium box.