Bug 38135

Summary:	VM ware's vmnet module fails to build
Product:	[Retired] Red Hat Linux	Reporter:	Red Hat Bugzilla <bugzilla>
Component:	kernel	Assignee:	Arjan van de Ven <arjanv>
Status:	CLOSED DUPLICATE	QA Contact:	Brock Organ <borgan>
Severity:	medium	Docs Contact:
Priority:	medium
Version:	7.1
Target Milestone:	---
Target Release:	---
Hardware:	i386
OS:	Linux
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version:		Doc Type:	Bug Fix
Doc Text:		Story Points:	---
Clone Of:		Environment:
Last Closed:	2001-04-27 23:22:18 UTC	Type:	---
Regression:	---	Mount Type:	---
Documentation:	---	CRM:
Verified Versions:		Category:	---
oVirt Team:	---	RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team:	---	Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:

Description Red Hat Bugzilla 2001-04-27 23:22:14 UTC

From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.4.2-2 i686)


Vmware tries to build the vmnet module and exits with this message:

"make: Entering directory `/tmp/vmware-config1/vmnet-only'
bridge.c: In function `VNetBridgeReceiveFromDev':
bridge.c:788: warning: implicit declaration of function `skb_datarefp'
make: Leaving directory `/tmp/vmware-config1/vmnet-only'
Unable to make a vmnet module that can be loaded in the running kernel:
/tmp/vmware-config1/vmnet.o: unresolved symbol skb_datarefp
There is probably a light difference of kernel configuration between the
set of C header files you specified and your running kernel. You may want
to rebuild a kernel based on that directory, or specify another directory."

According to vmware's website, this is usually a problem with the
distribution packaging different headers in /lib/modules/<kernel
version>/build/include than the actual kernel it's running.  I am running
the
stock 2.4.2-2 kernel.

Reproducible: Always
Steps to Reproduce:
1.  Install VMWare-2.0.3-799
2.  run vmware-config.pl
3.  answer yes to their questions to get them to build vmnet module

Comment 1 Red Hat Bugzilla 2001-04-28 08:06:44 UTC

This is a bug in vmware where it can't cope with recent 2.4 kernels. And even
if it weren't, you should take it up with their support people, not us.

(see bug 37254 for more info and the bugfix for their code)

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 37254 ***