* Julian Wiedmann [2012-05-10 22:29:19 -0000]:
> You're probably missing the rpcsec_gss_krb5 module. Try installing the
> linux-image-extra-virtual package.
Indeed that does the trick.
Now a couple of questions:
1) On what basis was rpcsec_gss_krb5 relegated to linux-image-extra-virtual
while auth_rpcgss is in linux-image-virtual? This makes no sense to me.
Most of linux-image-extra-virtual seems to be drivers that are unlikely to
be of interest on virtual hardware because hypervisors don't usually expose
those devices to the guest OS. rpcsec_gss_krb5, however, does not fit into
this category; I'd say it's just as likely to be needed in a virtual host
as in a physical one. And what's the point of shipping auth_rpcgss without
any actual GSS mechanisms?
2) Why is the description for package linux-image-extra-3.2.0-24-virtual
identical to that for package linux-image-3.2.0-24-virtual? It suggests
installing linux-virtual instead, but doing so will *not* pull in
limux-image-extra-virtual.
* Julian Wiedmann [2012-05-10 22:29:19 -0000]: extra-virtual package.
> You're probably missing the rpcsec_gss_krb5 module. Try installing the
> linux-image-
Indeed that does the trick.
Now a couple of questions:
1) On what basis was rpcsec_gss_krb5 relegated to linux-image- extra-virtual virtual? This makes no sense to me. extra-virtual seems to be drivers that are unlikely to
while auth_rpcgss is in linux-image-
Most of linux-image-
be of interest on virtual hardware because hypervisors don't usually expose
those devices to the guest OS. rpcsec_gss_krb5, however, does not fit into
this category; I'd say it's just as likely to be needed in a virtual host
as in a physical one. And what's the point of shipping auth_rpcgss without
any actual GSS mechanisms?
2) Why is the description for package linux-image- extra-3. 2.0-24- virtual 3.2.0-24- virtual? It suggests extra-virtual.
identical to that for package linux-image-
installing linux-virtual instead, but doing so will *not* pull in
limux-image-