Debian Bug report logs - #560822
dkms: modules are not automatically rebuilt for abi bumped kernels in certain cases

Package: dkms; Maintainer for dkms is Dynamic Kernel Module System Team <dkms@packages.debian.org>; Source for dkms is src:dkms (PTS, buildd, popcon).

Reported by: Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com>

Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2009 15:03:01 UTC

Severity: important

Found in version dkms/2.1.0.1-4

Done: Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Toggle useless messages

View this report as an mbox folder, status mbox, maintainer mbox

Report forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Dynamic Kernel Modules Support Team <pkg-dkms-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>:
Bug#560822; Package dkms. (Sat, 12 Dec 2009 15:03:04 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Acknowledgement sent to Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com>:
New Bug report received and forwarded. Copy sent to Dynamic Kernel Modules Support Team <pkg-dkms-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>. (Sat, 12 Dec 2009 15:03:04 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Message #5 received at submit@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

package: dkms
version: 2.1.0.1-4
severity: important

hi, i just upgraded to the linux 2.6.32 package today and noticed that
my kernel modules (virtualbox and fglrx) had not been rebuilt for the
new version. it would be very nice if dkms did this automagically.

also, this limitatation could have a significant impact (which is why i
rated this bug important) in the future if a kernel ABI change occurs
in the stable release since dkms modules for that new ABI will not be
available.  this would be a big headache to manually deal with;
whereas, it would be much easier to implement autorebuilding in
unstable now before dkms enters stable.

best wishes,
mike

Information forwarded to debian-bugs-dist@lists.debian.org, Dynamic Kernel Modules Support Team <pkg-dkms-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>:
Bug#560822; Package dkms. (Sat, 12 Dec 2009 15:09:03 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Acknowledgement sent to David Paleino <dapal@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Dynamic Kernel Modules Support Team <pkg-dkms-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>. (Sat, 12 Dec 2009 15:09:03 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Message #10 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Saturday 12 December 2009 11:02:02, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> package: dkms
> version: 2.1.0.1-4
> severity: important
> 
> hi, i just upgraded to the linux 2.6.32 package today and noticed that
> my kernel modules (virtualbox and fglrx) had not been rebuilt for the
> new version. it would be very nice if dkms did this automagically.

That should already happen as soon as you boot with your new kernel.

Could you please confirm it's not happening?

David

-- 
 . ''`.   Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
 : :'  : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
 `. `'`  GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
   `-   2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Acknowledgement sent to Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Dynamic Kernel Modules Support Team <pkg-dkms-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>. (Sat, 12 Dec 2009 15:18:08 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Message #15 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:06:53 +0100 David Paleino wrote:

> On Saturday 12 December 2009 11:02:02, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > package: dkms
> > version: 2.1.0.1-4
> > severity: important
> > 
> > hi, i just upgraded to the linux 2.6.32 package today and noticed that
> > my kernel modules (virtualbox and fglrx) had not been rebuilt for the
> > new version. it would be very nice if dkms did this automagically.
> 
> That should already happen as soon as you boot with your new kernel.
> 
> Could you please confirm it's not happening?

no, it did not happen.

mike

Message #20 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Saturday 12 December 2009 11:16:42, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:06:53 +0100 David Paleino wrote:
> > On Saturday 12 December 2009 11:02:02, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > > hi, i just upgraded to the linux 2.6.32 package today and noticed that
> > > my kernel modules (virtualbox and fglrx) had not been rebuilt for the
> > > new version. it would be very nice if dkms did this automagically.
> >
> > That should already happen as soon as you boot with your new kernel.
> >
> > Could you please confirm it's not happening?
> 
> no, it did not happen.

Would you please provide the output of "dkms status"?

-- 
 . ''`.   Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
 : :'  : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
 `. `'`  GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
   `-   2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #25 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:26:14 +0100 David Paleino wrote:

> On Saturday 12 December 2009 11:16:42, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:06:53 +0100 David Paleino wrote:
> > > On Saturday 12 December 2009 11:02:02, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > > > hi, i just upgraded to the linux 2.6.32 package today and noticed that
> > > > my kernel modules (virtualbox and fglrx) had not been rebuilt for the
> > > > new version. it would be very nice if dkms did this automagically.
> > >
> > > That should already happen as soon as you boot with your new kernel.
> > >
> > > Could you please confirm it's not happening?
> > 
> > no, it did not happen.
> 
> Would you please provide the output of "dkms status"?

dkms status had said:

# dkms status
fglrx, 9-11, 2.6.31-2-amd64, x86_64: installed 

i looked through /var/log/messages and saw something that said
'dkms_autobuild: missing linux-headers-2.6.32', so i installed
the headers.  now the module is built during boot and loaded:

# dkms status
fglrx, 9-11, 2.6.32-trunk-amd64, x86_64: installed 

so, it looks like the solution is to make sure that the correct headers
are installed alongside new kernel updates when using dkms.

mike

Reply sent to David Paleino <dapal@debian.org>:
You have taken responsibility. (Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:00:06 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Notification sent to Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com>:
Bug acknowledged by developer. (Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:00:06 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Message #30 received at 560822-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Saturday 12 December 2009 11:40:04, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> dkms status had said:
> 
> # dkms status
> fglrx, 9-11, 2.6.31-2-amd64, x86_64: installed
> 
> i looked through /var/log/messages and saw something that said
> 'dkms_autobuild: missing linux-headers-2.6.32', so i installed
> the headers.  now the module is built during boot and loaded:
> 
> # dkms status
> fglrx, 9-11, 2.6.32-trunk-amd64, x86_64: installed
> 
> so, it looks like the solution is to make sure that the correct headers
> are installed alongside new kernel updates when using dkms.

Exactly. :)

Closing the bug.

David

-- 
 . ''`.   Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
 : :'  : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
 `. `'`  GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
   `-   2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #35 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:56:20 +0100 David Paleino wrote:

> On Saturday 12 December 2009 11:40:04, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > dkms status had said:
> > 
> > # dkms status
> > fglrx, 9-11, 2.6.31-2-amd64, x86_64: installed
> > 
> > i looked through /var/log/messages and saw something that said
> > 'dkms_autobuild: missing linux-headers-2.6.32', so i installed
> > the headers.  now the module is built during boot and loaded:
> > 
> > # dkms status
> > fglrx, 9-11, 2.6.32-trunk-amd64, x86_64: installed
> > 
> > so, it looks like the solution is to make sure that the correct headers
> > are installed alongside new kernel updates when using dkms.
> 
> Exactly. :)

should dkms somehow enforce this (via an appropriate set of
dependencies)? a lot of users are going to do the exact same thing
when updating their kernel, and you may get a lot of similar bug
reports.  you could reduce their pain and yours by doing a little more
automagic.

mike

Message #40 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 06:06:22 -0500 Michael Gilbert wrote:

> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:56:20 +0100 David Paleino wrote:
> 
> > On Saturday 12 December 2009 11:40:04, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > > dkms status had said:
> > > 
> > > # dkms status
> > > fglrx, 9-11, 2.6.31-2-amd64, x86_64: installed
> > > 
> > > i looked through /var/log/messages and saw something that said
> > > 'dkms_autobuild: missing linux-headers-2.6.32', so i installed
> > > the headers.  now the module is built during boot and loaded:
> > > 
> > > # dkms status
> > > fglrx, 9-11, 2.6.32-trunk-amd64, x86_64: installed
> > > 
> > > so, it looks like the solution is to make sure that the correct headers
> > > are installed alongside new kernel updates when using dkms.
> > 
> > Exactly. :)
> 
> should dkms somehow enforce this (via an appropriate set of
> dependencies)? a lot of users are going to do the exact same thing
> when updating their kernel, and you may get a lot of similar bug
> reports.  you could reduce their pain and yours by doing a little more
> automagic.

i see the dependencies are already there. this is more of a problem
with the fact tha linux-headers-2.6-* still points to
linux-headers-2.6.31-*, which really isn't dkms's fault.  please
disregard my last messages.

thanks for the info and quick response!

mike

Did not alter fixed versions and reopened. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <owner@bugs.debian.org> to internal_control@bugs.debian.org. (Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:18:09 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Changed Bug title to 'make sure proper kernel headers are installed at kernel install-time' from 'dkms: please autorebuild modules when new kernel images are installed' Request was from David Paleino <dapal@debian.org> to control@bugs.debian.org. (Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:18:10 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Message #49 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

reopen 560822
retitle 560822 make sure proper kernel headers are installed at kernel install-time
thanks

On Saturday 12 December 2009 12:06:22, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:56:20 +0100 David Paleino wrote:
> > On Saturday 12 December 2009 11:40:04, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > > dkms status had said:
> > >
> > > # dkms status
> > > fglrx, 9-11, 2.6.31-2-amd64, x86_64: installed
> > >
> > > i looked through /var/log/messages and saw something that said
> > > 'dkms_autobuild: missing linux-headers-2.6.32', so i installed
> > > the headers.  now the module is built during boot and loaded:
> > >
> > > # dkms status
> > > fglrx, 9-11, 2.6.32-trunk-amd64, x86_64: installed
> > >
> > > so, it looks like the solution is to make sure that the correct headers
> > > are installed alongside new kernel updates when using dkms.
> >
> > Exactly. :)
> 
> should dkms somehow enforce this (via an appropriate set of
> dependencies)?

That's not possible, AFAIK. Also consider we're not depending on any kernel
version, so specifying "linux-headers-something" is not really possible.

> a lot of users are going to do the exact same thing
> when updating their kernel, and you may get a lot of similar bug
> reports.  you could reduce their pain and yours by doing a little more
> automagic.

I'm reopening the bug just to listen/read what other team members think about
this.
We could probably add an apt-get call to /etc/kernel/postinst.d/dkms , but I'm
not sure that would be acceptable.

(also, bug retitled for the purpose)

Kindly,
David

-- 
 . ''`.   Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
 : :'  : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
 `. `'`  GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
   `-   2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #54 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Saturday 12 December 2009 12:15:13, Michael Gilbert wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 06:06:22 -0500 Michael Gilbert wrote:
> > should dkms somehow enforce this (via an appropriate set of
> > dependencies)? a lot of users are going to do the exact same thing
> > when updating their kernel, and you may get a lot of similar bug
> > reports.  you could reduce their pain and yours by doing a little more
> > automagic.
> 
> i see the dependencies are already there. this is more of a problem
> with the fact tha linux-headers-2.6-* still points to
> linux-headers-2.6.31-*, which really isn't dkms's fault.  please
> disregard my last messages.

Keep in mind that those are "just" Recommends. The idea of using 
/etc/kernel/postinst.d/dkms still applies, read my other reply :-)

> thanks for the info and quick response!

You're welcome.

David

-- 
 . ''`.   Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
 : :'  : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
 `. `'`  GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
   `-   2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Acknowledgement sent to Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Dynamic Kernel Modules Support Team <pkg-dkms-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>. (Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:45:06 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Message #59 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Sat, 2009-12-12 at 17:16 +0100, David Paleino wrote:
[...]
> I'm reopening the bug just to listen/read what other team members think about
> this.
> We could probably add an apt-get call to /etc/kernel/postinst.d/dkms , but I'm
> not sure that would be acceptable.
[...]

This script is called by dpkg and you cannot run dpkg recursively (at
least not to make changes).

Ben.

-- 
Ben Hutchings
Logic doesn't apply to the real world. - Marvin Minsky

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #64 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:41:33 +0000 Ben Hutchings wrote:
> I'm reopening the bug just to listen/read what other team members think about
> this.
> We could probably add an apt-get call to /etc/kernel/postinst.d/dkms , but I'm
> not sure that would be acceptable.

i've submitted a new wishlist bug against the kernel requesting that
linux-headers be made automagic, which would also solve this issue
[0].  hopefully that is a reasonable request.

mike

[0] http://bugs.debian.org/560831

Reply sent to David Paleino <dapal@debian.org>:
You have taken responsibility. (Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:51:14 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Notification sent to Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com>:
Bug acknowledged by developer. (Sat, 12 Dec 2009 16:51:14 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Message #69 received at 560822-done@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Saturday 12 December 2009 17:41:33, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> On Sat, 2009-12-12 at 17:16 +0100, David Paleino wrote:
> [...]
> 
> > I'm reopening the bug just to listen/read what other team members think
> > about this.
> > We could probably add an apt-get call to /etc/kernel/postinst.d/dkms ,
> > but I'm not sure that would be acceptable.
> 
> [...]
> 
> This script is called by dpkg and you cannot run dpkg recursively (at
> least not to make changes).

Uhm, right. I believe we already discussed this somewhen in the past :-)

Definitely closing the bug then.

David

-- 
 . ''`.   Debian developer | http://wiki.debian.org/DavidPaleino
 : :'  : Linuxer #334216 --|-- http://www.hanskalabs.net/
 `. `'`  GPG: 1392B174 ----|---- http://snipr.com/qa_page
   `-   2BAB C625 4E66 E7B8 450A C3E1 E6AA 9017 1392 B174

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, inline)]

Message #74 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

reopen 560822
tag 560822 patch
thanks

i've created a patch that automatically fetches the headers if they
are missing.  see attached debdiff.  i believe error checking is
sufficient because if apt-get fails, then the existance of the modules
is checked again, and an error is thrown if they are still missing.

mike

[dkms.debdiff (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Added tag(s) patch. Request was from Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com> to control@bugs.debian.org. (Sat, 12 Dec 2009 18:12:09 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Acknowledgement sent to Giuseppe Iuculano <giuseppe@iuculano.it>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Dynamic Kernel Modules Support Team <pkg-dkms-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>. (Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:42:04 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Message #83 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

tag 560822 - patch

Il 12/12/2009 19:10, Michael Gilbert ha scritto:
> reopen 560822
> tag 560822 patch
> thanks
> 
> i've created a patch that automatically fetches the headers if they
> are missing.  see attached debdiff.  i believe error checking is
> sufficient because if apt-get fails, then the existance of the modules
> is checked again, and an error is thrown if they are still missing.
> 

This is not a good idea, we can't call apt-get from a postinst.

Cheers,
Giuseppe.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Removed tag(s) patch. Request was from Giuseppe Iuculano <giuseppe@iuculano.it> to control@bugs.debian.org. (Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:42:06 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Message #90 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 20:38:40 +0100 Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:

> tag 560822 - patch
> 
> Il 12/12/2009 19:10, Michael Gilbert ha scritto:
> > reopen 560822
> > tag 560822 patch
> > thanks
> > 
> > i've created a patch that automatically fetches the headers if they
> > are missing.  see attached debdiff.  i believe error checking is
> > sufficient because if apt-get fails, then the existance of the modules
> > is checked again, and an error is thrown if they are still missing.
> > 
> 
> This is not a good idea, we can't call apt-get from a postinst.

my intent for this patch is for it to be executed only during the boot
dkms module rebuild process.  from brief testing, i've seen that this
is the case (it is only executed at boot or runlevel change).

i do not believe that dkms_autoinstaller is actually called during the
postinst (unless i'm missing something).  i do see that in the postinst,
update-rc.d is used to update the contents of the script, but it does
not appear to be called there.

mike

Message #95 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Il 13/02/2010 21:07, Michael Gilbert ha scritto:
> my intent for this patch is for it to be executed only during the boot
> dkms module rebuild process.  from brief testing, i've seen that this
> is the case (it is only executed at boot or runlevel change).

Which version? we removed[1] the init script.

[1]http://git.debian.org/?p=collab-maint/dkms.git;a=commitdiff;h=ec26539

Cheers,
Giuseppe

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Message #100 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

On Sat, 13 Feb 2010 21:14:02 +0100 Giuseppe Iuculano wrote:

> Il 13/02/2010 21:07, Michael Gilbert ha scritto:
> > my intent for this patch is for it to be executed only during the boot
> > dkms module rebuild process.  from brief testing, i've seen that this
> > is the case (it is only executed at boot or runlevel change).
> 
> Which version? we removed[1] the init script.

i was not aware of that.  i'm pretty sure that it is the version that
gets installed to /usr/lib/dkms/dkms_autoinstaller.  the last time i
tested the patch was with 2.1.0.1, so i'll need to test that it still
works appropriately with the latest version.

mike

Message #105 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

retitle 560822 dkms: modules are not automatically rebuilt for abi bumped kernels in certain cases
thanks

ok, so i was looking into this a bit more since i just upgraded from
2.6.32-2 to 2.6.32-3. playing the part of the average/naive user, i
did:

$ apt-get install linux-image-2.6.32-3-amd64

which upon conclusion did not rebuild my existing dkms modules
(i.e. /lib/modules/2.6.32-3/updates/dkms did not exist). the
dkms_autoinstaller script was indeed run in the kernel's postinst, but
it failed because i had forgotten the headers (note this wouldn't
have been obvious to the average user). so thinking that all i need
now are the headers, i did:

$ apt-get install linux-headers-2.6.32-3-amd64

but my modules still were not built. so, at that point, i decided to
start over to figure out the right way to bump the kernel. i removed
those two packages and instead installed the image and headers at the
same time:

$ apt-get install linux-image-2.6.32-3-amd64 linux-headers-2.6.32-3-amd64

and my modules were in fact built. so, i think the core of the problem
is that there is no check in the kernel's postinst to throw an error if
the headers are missing. i see two possible automated/user-friendly
solutions.

1. add the headers as a recommends for all of the kernel-image packages
- since apt now installs all recommends by default, this will solve
the problem quite satisfactorily.
- however, the kernel maintainers may not be very receptive to such an
intrusive change

2. run dkms_autoinstaller from the linux-headers postinst instead of
the linux-image postinst
- this partially solves the problem since the modules will actually
get built as soon as the headers are available.
- however, this doesn't tell the naive user that they are missing
something. a solution to that may be to detect missing headers
in the linux-image postinst that says "you need to install
linux-headers-XXXXXX package" in order to bring your kernel
modules up to date.

anyway, hope this is info is somehow useful. it should be relatively
straightforward to implement option 2, and i can do that if there is
concurrance/support for it.

mike

Changed Bug title to 'dkms: modules are not automatically rebuilt for abi bumped kernels in certain cases' from 'make sure proper kernel headers are installed at kernel install-time' Request was from Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com> to control@bugs.debian.org. (Sat, 27 Feb 2010 06:33:08 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Acknowledgement sent to Giuseppe Iuculano <iuculano@debian.org>:
Extra info received and forwarded to list. Copy sent to Dynamic Kernel Modules Support Team <pkg-dkms-maint@lists.alioth.debian.org>. (Sat, 27 Feb 2010 08:18:03 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Message #112 received at 560822@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

block 560822 by 569724
thanks

Il 27/02/2010 07:31, Michael Gilbert ha scritto:
> dkms_autoinstaller script was indeed run in the kernel's postinst, but
> it failed because i had forgotten the headers (note this wouldn't
> have been obvious to the average user). so thinking that all i need
> now are the headers, i did:
> 
> $ apt-get install linux-headers-2.6.32-3-amd64
> 
> but my modules still were not built.  so, at that point, i decided to

This happened because linux-header packages don't support
/etc/kernel/header_postinst.d directory

Cheers,
Giuseppe.

[signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, attachment)]

Added blocking bug(s) of 560822: 569724 Request was from Giuseppe Iuculano <iuculano@debian.org> to control@bugs.debian.org. (Sat, 27 Feb 2010 08:18:08 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Reply sent to Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com>:
You have taken responsibility. (Mon, 17 May 2010 01:45:06 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Notification sent to Michael Gilbert <michael.s.gilbert@gmail.com>:
Bug acknowledged by developer. (Mon, 17 May 2010 01:45:06 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Message #119 received at 560822-close@bugs.debian.org (full text, mbox, reply):

this was fixed by the patches i made to bug #569724.

mike

Bug archived. Request was from Debbugs Internal Request <owner@bugs.debian.org> to internal_control@bugs.debian.org. (Mon, 14 Jun 2010 07:32:17 GMT) (full text, mbox, link).

Send a report that this bug log contains spam.

Debian bug tracking system administrator <owner@bugs.debian.org>. Last modified: Sun Jul 2 06:16:30 2023; Machine Name: bembo

Debian Bug tracking system

Debbugs is free software and licensed under the terms of the GNU Public License version 2. The current version can be obtained from https://bugs.debian.org/debbugs-source/.

Debian Bug report logs - #560822 dkms: modules are not automatically rebuilt for abi bumped kernels in certain cases

Debian Bug report logs - #560822
dkms: modules are not automatically rebuilt for abi bumped kernels in certain cases