Re: 2.4.x kernels with ipvs in the kernel and as modules

To: <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: 2.4.x kernels with ipvs in the kernel and as modules
From: "Scott Jones" <scott@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2001 08:59:11 -0700
Hi Joe,

I just tried it out and was able to configure a 2.4.3 monolithic kernel with
the ipvs set up as "built-in" rather than in modules.  It'd be nice if I
could actually use this kernel (the SCSI drivers are screwed up for it for
my machine)!  So, I'm sticking with 2.2.18 and ipvs 1.05 right now...

Did you turn off modules completely in the "Loadable module support"

I noticed that if you set up the virtual server support as a module, then at
most, you could set up all of the schedulers as modules...  Maybe that could
be the problem?


----- Original Message -----
From: "Joseph Mack" <mack.joseph@xxxxxxx>
To: <lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; <ja@xxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, April 27, 2001 5:11 AM
Subject: 2.4.x kernels with ipvs in the kernel and as modules

> I'm looking at the README for ipvs-0.2.11
> It has what looks like a section on building the kernel
> as modules and another section for building within the
> kernel. I assumed the later was not as modules
> but as a monolithic kernel (ie the schedulers are
> built in and there is no ip_vs_rr.o produced).
> However with make menuconfig I can only build the schedulers
> as modules.
> This does give me a working 2.4.3 SMP LVS. (I haven't
> gone back to yesterday's problem yet with building and SMP
> kernel)
> Is it possible to build ipvs for 2.4.x kernels
> without any modules, ie with all the code in the kernel?
> Joe
> --
> Joseph Mack PhD, Senior Systems Engineer, Lockheed Martin
> contractor to the National Environmental Supercomputer Center,
> mailto:mack.joseph@xxxxxxx ph# 919-541-0007, RTP, NC, USA
> _______________________________________________
> mailing list - lvs-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Send requests to lvs-users-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> or go to

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>