Re: net-pf-10, 2.6.1

Jim McCloskey
2004-02-01T09:28:49Z

--text follows this line--

* On Sat Jan 31 2004 - 21:36:58 EST, Steve Youngs wrote:

|> > |> > install net-pf-10 /bin/true
|>
|> This _is_ what you want in your modprobe.conf file. Or possibly
|> `install net-pf-10-* /bin/true', but I'm pretty sure that Rusty has
|> added some backward compatibility code so that either _should_ work.
|>
|> The other thing that you need to do once you have updated
|> modprobe.conf is to run `depmod' to regenerate the dependency
|> files.

I've tried the variations I can think of---putting the line:

install net-pf-10 /bin/true

in /lib/modules/modprobe.conf via update-modules, or directly by hand-editing.
Then depmod; then reboot. Also:

install net-pf-10-* /bin/true
install net-pf-* /bin/true

All variations still lead to:

Jan 31 23:08:01 ohlone kernel: request_module: failed /sbin/modprobe -- net-pf-10. error = 256
Jan 31 23:23:01 ohlone kernel: request_module: failed /sbin/modprobe -- net-pf-10. error = 256

on each run of exim from cron (Debian exim has ipv6 support compiled
in). If I run modprobe manually, I get:

ohlone# modprobe net-pf-10
FATAL: Module ipv6 not found.

indicating that modprobe knows about the alias, but is not running
/bin/true when requested to load the module.

However: if I manually edit /etc/modprobe.d/aliases (which you're not
supposed to do), so as to comment out:

# alias net-pf-10 ipv6

and then add:

install ipv6 /bin/true

(update-modules; depmod; reboot), `modprobe ipv6' from the
command-line completes silently and without error (but without loading
the module, of course, since it doesn't exist). Which I think is the
expected behaviour.

But even at that point, in the logs we still get:

Feb 1 00:53:01 ohlone /USR/SBIN/CRON[280]: (mail) CMD ( if [ -x /usr/lib/exim/exim3 -a -f /etc/exim/exim.conf ]; then /usr/lib/exim/exim3 -q ; fi)
Feb 1 00:53:01 ohlone kernel: request_module: failed /sbin/modprobe -- net-pf-10. error = 256

(because exim is trying to load the module under the name net-pf-10??)

Here are some pointers to what seems to be the same or a similar problem:

http://www.mail-archive.com/debian-user-german@lists.debian.org/msg66557.html
http://www.spinics.net/lists/kernel/msg236360.html
http://lkml.org/lkml/2004/1/13/72
http://forum.hardware.fr/hardwarefr/OSAlternatifs/citer-24424-387523-58.htm

Oh well, it is a very small problem (all it does is clutter the
log-files). Thanks very much to all who helped,

Jim