Hi Pavel,
thanks for explaining. It's not a big problem, ofcourse I can run depmod
manually too.
Greetings from Berlin,
Niels
On Tue, 2006-02-28 at 02:01 -0500, Pavel Roskin wrote:
> Hello, Niels!
>
> On Wed, 2006-02-22 at 11:33 +0100, Niels de Vos wrote:
> > While I'm compiling the module for my other kernels as well, I noticed a
> > little inconsistency in the Makefile. Attached a little patch for it.
> > Running depmod should be done against the just compiled modules, which
> > could be for an other kernel than the running one. So giving the
> > kernelrelease as parameter for depmod is nicer as done in the patch :)
>
> This was done on purpose to prevent errors from depmod in case if the
> kernel is not fully installed, e.g. System.map for the target kernel is
> missing. It's easier to run depmod for the running kernel than to check
> whether the module was compiled for the current kernel. The running
> kernel should have no problems with depmod. The only way to get the new
> kernel is to reboot, and most setups run depmod on boot.
>
> I may reconsider if you actually had some kind of a failure. I haven't
> seen anyone complaining about this issue.
>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
|
