What is the output of depmod -a?

Um, are you trying to compile ndiswrapper from a cd? I think that make install needs to write to the local direcotry and that isn't going to happen in you are working off of a cd.

I meant the kernel source code

Yes

the ouput of depmod -a was:

depmod: *** Unresolved symbols in /lib/modules/2.4.22-1.2115.nptl/misc/ndiswrapper.o

No not from CD. I downloaded it from Internet to /mnt directory

To be honest, I have no real good ideas anymore. I've done a bit of googling, and from the contents of this site I'm suspecting that Red Hat has done something with this kernel that is causing the trouble. The reason I'm suspecting is this quote from that site:

What you are experiencing is NOT normal for ndiswrapper. As a comparison, I compiled and loaded ndiswrapper 0.11 on my system today and it compiled and loaded without a hitch. To my way of thinking that suggests Red Hat has done something. So there are a couple of things you could try:

- Search RedHat repositories and see if anyone has a compiled RPM of ndiswrapper for this kernel

-Find a different Kernel from RedHat

-Compile your own kernel

-Switch distros to something like Debian, Slackware or Mandrake. If you are a RedHat afficianado, maybe jump up to FC2.

Sorry, but as I said, this is not normal and all indications point to your distro as the culprit.

Hi Hangdog42

Many Thanks for your help and I appreciate your paitient.

let me try to update the kernel ..Do you think it will be useful?,,,what will be the good site for that?

Thanks

Well, I usuall compile my own kernel from source code I get from kernel.org . I've got a guide to compiling a kernel on my site but that is kind of geared towards Slackware. Most of the generalities are the same, but there may be some specific steps that are different, particularly since you probably use GRUB instead of LILO. You might check in the RedHat forum here and see if there are any RH specific compiling guides there.

Hi HangDog42

Do you thing my problem is: May be I did not use the right windows driver?

How can I double check that, I am sure that my driver is Dell Dual Band 1450 mini-PCI and under linux it comes:

lspci:
02:03.0 Network Controller: Broadcom Corporation: Unknown device 4324 (rev 03)

lspci -n
02:03.0 Class 0280:14e4:4324 (rev 03)

see this link it has the same chipset:

http://www.dslreports.com/forum/rema...0585~mode=flat


when I downloaded my previous windows driver it did not match those numbers above,because I could not find exact numbers which are:

Device ID:4324 and Vender ID:14e4 !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!.



The link below is for my windows WLAN driver

http://support.dell.com/support/down...=6483&devlib=5



But in this site I could not find my driver as supported :!!!!!!!!!

http://ndiswrapper.sourceforge.net/s..._chipsets.html


How can I be sure that I am using the right driver?????

Thanks

So far your problem has nothing to do with the windows driver. You're getting unresolved symbols in the ndiswrapper module which means that there are kernel services that the modules expects to be provided by the existing kernel, but they aren't there. If you read through the article I linked to, that person is suggesting that Red Hat has used modversioning in their kernel to try and keep people from using modules compiled against different kernels. In your case this may also be keeping you from compiling a usable ndiswrapper module.

From what I've been reading, in order to get this to work you need a kernel that doesn't have modversioning enabled. Red Hat may have such a kernel on their site or you can compile your own from source. In either case, it isn't likely to be a problem with your Windows drivers.

HangDog42

Is there any mismatched between the driver that I found its name from the linux by using lspci and lspci -n which were:

lspci:
02:03.0 Network Controller: Broadcom Corporation: Unknown device 4324 (rev 03)

lspci -n
02:03.0 Class 0280:14e4:4324 (rev 03)


and from windows XP by using my Dell Wireless WLAN card utility:


Hardware Details:

Board: Dell Wireless WLAN 1450 adapter Rev 10.3
Chipset: BCM 4306/BCM 2060
MAC Address : 00:90:4B:89:9d : d1

My qyery why there is mismatched between the number in liux 4324 and number in windows 4306

I believe the BCM stands for BroadCoM chipset.


Thanks

They certainly are mismatched, and to be frank, I believe the output of lspci more than I do the output of Windows. If you are using a Dell 1450, then according to the ndiswrapper site the 4324 chipset is the proper one to focus on. However, in your case, you were never getting far enough for the windows driver to matter. You are getting errors when you try to load the module, and as I said, that appears to be from the way RH compiles the kernel.

Hi HangDog42

I was trying to practice with this link

http://www.jsanten.demon.nl/linux/bootsectsolution.htm

When I trying to export vmlinuz from Linux OS (/boot partition) ,to windows via program called Explore2fs(windows program),,,why does it give me error message??:

"Can't handle anything but regular files at the moment".


There are 3 names in my linux /boot partition:

vmlinuz
vmlinuz-2.40.20-8
vmlinux-2.40.20-8

which one of these is the kernel??? because I was only able to export the name with x;(vmlinux-2.40.20-8).

see the last 2 names are identical except z,x ,,,,Are there any reason for that?

Thanks

I"m sorry, but I'm completely unfamiliar with Explore2fs. I have no idea why it would give you the error message.

Actually, all three of those are kernels. As for which one is "the" kernel, that depends on the selection you make from LILO or GRUB. In theory, you should be able to boot from all three.

The z on the end means that the kernel has been compressed to save on disk space. Kernels ending in x are uncompressed. In your case the two 2.40.20-8 kernels are probably exactly the same, but one is compressed and the other is not. As to why only vmlinux-2.40.20-8 was the only one you could export, I have no idea. I suppose you could use ls -l to see if is has different permissions that tne other two. At least from a linux point of view, all three of these are just files. If you have the right permissions you should be able to use these as you would any other file.

Hi HangDog42

Thank for your help, I was able to access the internet via wireless card, I used FC2 instead of FC1, and as you said the problem with FC1's kernel.

Now I have got another issue to solve, I mounted the NTFS prtition to Linux OS , I can see the mounted partition on my linux desktop, but I can not modify any files , I can only read it with out any permission to write to it!!!!!!!!,, what should I do ,, have you got any clue about that?

Thanks

Basically, Linux can't write to an NTFS partition. You'll find people who will tell you it can, and technically they are correct, but there are some serious restrictions on how it works. For example, I think you can only write to an existing file and it has to be the exact same size as it was before you wrote. In other words, pretty much worthless. If you need to write to files from Linux that Windows can read, create a FAT32 partition. Linux can read and write to those without a problem.

Congrats on getting wireless working!

HangDog42

As you know the bits for chmod are : rwx, which is 2^2 for r (4 in decimal),and 2^1 for w(2 in decimal), and 2^0 for x(1 in decimal).

if we say permission is :755 , that means we have rwx r-x r-x.

Now in umask we have octal value, not bits value, ie we can't the same format as in chmod, which are rwx.

now if you look to this link , he has done this !!!!how does it work?

http://linux-ntfs.sourceforge.net/info/ntfs.html , article 4-9:

Don't confuse permissions with ability. It is easy to mount an NTFS partition and give write permissions (using either chmod or umask....I'm not an expert on either so your probablyl better off reading the man pages) . However, permission to write to an NTFS partition doesn't necessarily mean that you have the ability to safely write to the NTFS partition. I'm including a quote from section 3.2 of the FAQ you linked to:


On my laptop, I dual boot Slackware and XP, and it is pretty easy to mount the XP drives (also check out the fstab file to mount things at boot) but I leave them as read-only for the reasons stated in the quote. If I need to write to XP, I actually mount a USB drive (which is VFAT, not NTFS) and write to that instead of NTFS.