Red Hat Bugzilla – Bug 137170
'Coda' module not built by default
Last modified: 2007-11-30 17:07:04 EST
Description of problem: There is no 'coda' module installed by default
Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
Testing on RHEL Desktop 3
How reproducible: occurs every time.
Steps to Reproduce:
1. 'modprobe coda'
modprobe: Can't locate module coda
(no result; lsmod shows it in loaded modules)
The kernel module should be built.
This is a feature request. The fs/coda module is actually built,
but it is listed in the linux-modules-unsupported list.
Internal RFE bug #137368 entered; will be considered for future releases.
As there is only one way to get coda functionality - put it in the
kernel - this is much more important than "we'll do this in a future
release, maybe". I absolutely need this functionality, and I still
want to use your kernels. What should I do?
Tim, you can install the appropriate kernel-[smp-]supported-* RPM
to get coda functionality. We have no idea if it will work, nor
do intend to support it in future RHEL releases.
Where could I find these kernels in the RedHat Network interface?
Why are you not planning on supporting this in the future?
Tim, the "kernel-unsupported" RPMs simply contain modules that can be
installed in addition to the base RPMs. For example, if you install
kernel-smp-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL as your base kernel, then you can augment
it with kernel-smp-unsupported-2.4.21-20.0.1.EL. These are the x86 SMP
packages in the "Red Hat Enterprise Linux AS (v. 3 for x86)" RHN channel
at the moment.
As for not supporting the Coda filesystem in the future, apparently RH
Product Management doesn't feel there is enough business justification.
Supporting a new filesystem responsibly requires a substantial
development and support effort. For enterprise customers, they demand
support, QA, bugfixes, performance enhancements and security errata.
So we can't just throw in Coda on an "as-is" basis.
We haven't seen the business justification to warrant staffing up Coda
Since it's in the 'unsupported' list, and therefore builds as well as
the kernel itself, I'm content. Thanks.