[quote]
Alan, that find returns no matches. xfs.ko has mysteriously vanished!
[/quote]
Of course, I [i]should[/i] have also asked you for your system's architecture . . .
It's all "water under the bridge" now that [b]Trevor[/b] has "put his finger on it".
[RESOLVED] XFS kernel module missing in CentOS 6
- AlanBartlett
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 9345
- Joined: 2007/10/22 11:30:09
- Location: ~/Earth/UK/England/Suffolk
- Contact:
Re: XFS kernel module missing in CentOS 6
Yes, the mystery of the missing xfs module appears to be solved. Looks like I'll be heading into Debian country. Thanks again!
Re: XFS kernel module missing in CentOS 6
[quote]
secant wrote:
Yes, the mystery of the missing xfs module appears to be solved. Looks like I'll be heading into Debian country. Thanks again![/quote]
I would expect the x86_64 version to become more common because it supports more memory (etc), but you're probably not able to run that on your hardware given your answer?
Nevertheless, I see more downloads of i386 than of x86_64 in my BT client.
secant wrote:
Yes, the mystery of the missing xfs module appears to be solved. Looks like I'll be heading into Debian country. Thanks again![/quote]
I would expect the x86_64 version to become more common because it supports more memory (etc), but you're probably not able to run that on your hardware given your answer?
Nevertheless, I see more downloads of i386 than of x86_64 in my BT client.
- AlanBartlett
- Forum Moderator
- Posts: 9345
- Joined: 2007/10/22 11:30:09
- Location: ~/Earth/UK/England/Suffolk
- Contact:
Re: [RESOLVED] XFS kernel module missing in CentOS 6
[quote]
alm2k wrote:
I would expect the x86_64 version to become more common because it supports more memory (etc), but you're probably not able to run that on your hardware given your answer?
Nevertheless, I see more downloads of i386 than of x86_64 in my BT client.[/quote]
I guess you missed what the OP typed in post #8 --
[quote]
this machine isn't capable of running a 64-bit OS.
[/quote]
On behalf of the OP, and for posterity, this thread is marked [RESOLVED].
alm2k wrote:
I would expect the x86_64 version to become more common because it supports more memory (etc), but you're probably not able to run that on your hardware given your answer?
Nevertheless, I see more downloads of i386 than of x86_64 in my BT client.[/quote]
I guess you missed what the OP typed in post #8 --
[quote]
this machine isn't capable of running a 64-bit OS.
[/quote]
On behalf of the OP, and for posterity, this thread is marked [RESOLVED].