Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon <at> gmail.com> writes:
> > Look at lspci -v. It lists quite a few kernel drivers.... > I'm not sure I follow you. It was just to answer your 'quip' that grep is my friend. I understand the difference between a driver lock to hardware, and one that's part of X. It was just an example to show you that lots of drivers can be discovered, quite easily. > Weren't you looking for the X video driver? You won't find that in lspci, Obviously. That said, it should not be that obscure to discover the video driver info. When it was part of dmeg (kernel) it was not hard. Now it's part of X and one has to parse lots of stuff. Maybe my complaint needs to be registered elsewhere (with the X devs)..... > Another thing that people all too easily lose sight of is that if someone > wants such information as which X driver is loaded, then we assume that the > person knows enough about the system to know where to look and knows the > usual tools for looking there. In much the same way as we expect the car > mechanic to know where the spark plugs are and what they do. Now this is the 'horseshit' logic that I used the lspci example to displace. Quickly discerning drivers, whatever their venue is of great importance. That's why many are easy to discover. It seem to me in the 'genius' to move things to X, some forgot how easy it was to discern the video driver, quite a few kernel revs ago....... Parsimg the X log files is just a poor way to make that information available. Think of the massive new folks to linux, think they'll be ready for that when something in X or their driver is messed up? Seriously, you sound very condescending here with this. A simple, parse the X log files is the state of art for discerning X drivers, is sufficient. Anyway, thanks for you help (and comments).... I done with this thread. James
