[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
(usagi-users 00059) Re: kernel-2.4.0-0.24usagi20001101a.586.rpm
- To: usagi-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: (usagi-users 00059) Re: kernel-2.4.0-0.24usagi20001101a.586.rpm
- From: Jens-Ulrik Petersen <jens-ulrik.petersen@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 18 Dec 2000 12:25:38 +0900
- In-reply-to: Jens-Ulrik Petersen's message of "13 Dec 2000 18:18:33 +0900"
- References: <m3k8947k7q.fsf@tolnx04.europe.nokia.com>
- Reply-to: usagi-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Sender: jepeters@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- User-agent: Gnus/5.0807 (Gnus v5.8.7) XEmacs/21.1 (GTK)
[Following up to myself]
Jens-Ulrik Petersen <jens-ulrik.petersen@xxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Perhaps I am wrong, but I suspect that the rpm in the title doesn't
> have ipv6 support compiled in. That's doesn't matter so much since
> it is not so up to date any more, but just thought I would mention
> it for next time you build an rpm for Redhat Linux. (Redhat don't
> enable ipv6 support in their kernels, unlike Kondara and
> Vine-devel.)
But of course even better it is available as a module (ipv6.o).... so
there is no problem. :-)
Are there any differences from the user point of view bewtween using
IPv6 as a module or in compiled?
Jens