Heather <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't think orinoco cards can be classed as either rare or crappy > - but their module has definitely changed names, and *that* was > dependent on the kernel rev.
Apples ... oranges. I was *not* talking about orinoco cards. However, since you have brought the subject up. Orinoco cards, like most cards, now have two sets of drivers. In this case, they are named differently. The 2.4 kernel driver is named "orinoco_cs", the standalone is named "wvlan_cs". Note that either driver works with the 2.4 kernels. > ... not solely though, I think. If the external pcmcia-cs modules > and the kernel-internal modules (for new kernels) are also named > differently, then auto-includes on kernel rev along wouldn't > necessarily work either. Hmmmm... No. That's not the way to handle things. With the 2.4 kernels, most users can choose which set of drivers they want to use. (The exception being those with hardware that is supported by only one set of drivers.) The latest pcmcia-cs packages checks for the presence of the standalone drivers for the currently running kernel. If they are found, then cardmgr is configured to use those. Otherwise, it is configured to use the 2.4 kernel drivers. That is my current solution. I welcome feedback from anyone explaining why it is not sufficient. Please, however, provide concrete examples of what is failing and when it fails. - Brian
