Module build fails on 2.6.5 kernel (SuSE 9.1 Pro)

[Ninho]

Sej, you are welcome to simply ignore this thread as it does not
please you. Why would you want it closed ?

Your "points" in brief :

1. I'm not obsessed to speak to Sun personal at all! I came here
for a solution to a problem which you apparently aren't able to
provide, so you deemed this thread should better be closed ?

2. It is kind of obvious you can't read, or your logic is flaky !

supported SUSE Linux 9 and 10, openSUSE 10.1, 10.2, 10.3 and 11

Who, apart from you, ever mentionned "suse pro 10" (sic) ?

3. The manual was revised and is perfectly clear.
That it's not a bug in the software is your opinion,
which you're noisily and pointlessly repeating over again.

P.S. FYI I already filled a bug with Sun.
Needless to say I'd rather hear how to fix it sooner on this here forum.
Fortunately the majority of participants is clued and well behaved.

[Technologov]

Let's get back to the topic:

Maybe try to upgrade the kernel ? (2.6.18+)
But you will also need qt4.3 which is not part of SUSE 9.1

[Ninho]

Maybe try to upgrade the kernel ? (2.6.18+)
But you will also need qt4.3 which is not part of SUSE 9.1

Hmm... I'm reluctant, because I would then have to compile a plain vanilla
kernel as opposed to a SUSE one, and it could cost me lost compatibility
with other apps, without any guarantee for making VBox work in return !

[greenpossum]

2. its kind of obvious that the manual refers to SLES enterprise 9 and 10 and not suse pro, as there was no suse pro 10!

No, it is not obvious. That sentence in the manual says "SUSE 9 and 10", nothing said about Pro by the way. Now, having been a SUSE and now an OpenSUSE user, I know that versions 9 and 10.x, x = 0,1 were called SUSE Linux. OpenSUSE came into existence with 10.2. The enterprise versions were called Novell SLES (and SLED). So there are two possibilities: The Manual does mean SUSE Linux 9 and 10, but is outdated in that claim. Or it means SLES and that sentence should be corrected. Either way there is a bug in the documentation.

[Ninho]

The Manual does mean SUSE Linux 9 and 10, but is outdated in that claim. Or it means SLES and that sentence should be corrected. Either way there is a bug in the documentation.

Obviously the developers can't have checked every combination of distributions, and update patches. The intention is quite clear IMHO, that of supporting SUSE Linux, then OpenSUSE, versions 9 and 10. The stated intention is also that it should work with all flavours of Linux using 2.6.any kernels regardless of distributions. The fact that it does not indeed is a bug, but declaring the bug to be "in the documentation" clearly would be the lazy, if easy, solution :=)

Encouragingly the author of the sripts in cause seems to be willing to look into the sources - at this early point it would look like they take the matter more seriously than certain contributors in this forum did ;=)

[greenpossum]

The intention is quite clear IMHO, that of supporting SUSE Linux, then OpenSUSE, versions 9 and 10.

Actually I don't share your, um, optimism. I think that it's a documentation bug and they meant to write SLES 9 and 10 and also they meant selected versions of 2.6 kernels. My opinion is that you will get a "sorry not supported" reply. But don't let my opinion deter you.

[Ninho]

My opinion is that you will get a "sorry not supported" reply. But don't let my opinion deter you.

Actually it might depend how tough the problem proves to be.
Wait and see...



<http://www.virtualbox.org/ticket/2986>


--
Ninho

[Ninho]

For the record, the answer we got on the bugtracker confirmed this issue to be a bug. Sensibly, the fact that a bug is tough has never been a reason to declare it "not a bug" !


I wish to thank all the participants in this thread - even the negationists - for their sometimes provocative thoughts...

[greenpossum]

Still, your work is only beginning should you accept the challenge. Even if you manage to work around this bug and compile the kernel module, there are still the supporting libraries and software to compile, and it's unknown if they will compile with the gcc that you have in 9.1.

Anyway I'm glad I'm not in your shoes. It's understandable that you don't want to destabilise a working server, and I would feel the same way too. But sometimes old software is just old software; it may power a server forever, but you can't make a silk purse out of it.

[KuleRucket]

Actually your patronising argument is irrelevent. I get exactly the same problem using SuSE Enterprise Linux 9 SP4. And before getting on your high horse about using SLES 10, our customer uses SLES 9 on thousands of computers and have not fully ported all of their systems to work on SLES 10.

Looking at the problem report, the problem seems to be with SUSE applying changes to their version of the kernel. Theoretically you could download the default version of the kernel in you distro and use the /proc/config.gz to build the standard one with the same options. I haven't tried this myself because we cannot force our customer to do this.

EDIT: Typos corrected.

[KuleRucket]

The problem report 2986 states that there is no easy way to detect SUSE kernels. What about checking for the kernel configuration item CONFIG_SUSE_KERNEL=y?

e.g. zcat /proc/config.gz | grep CONFIG_SUSE_KERNEL

Kule

[greenpossum]

But railing at me for calling a spade a spade isn't going to help you find a solution is it? BTW, I only speak for myself, not for Sun or any of the developers. I'm in no way connected to them except as a user. I wouldn't want you to get angry at them. In any case, sincere wishes for success on your part.