On Fri, 20 Sep 2002, Johannes Erdfelt wrote: | On Sat, Sep 21, 2002, Brad Hards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- | > Hash: SHA1 | > | > On Sat, 21 Sep 2002 06:42, David Brownell wrote: | > > >>I wasn't joking about putting back the /proc/bus/usb/drivers file. This | > > >> is really going to hurt us in 2.6. | > > | > > Considering that the main use of that file that I know about was | > > implicit (usbfs is available if its files are present, another | > > assumption broken in 2.5), I'm not sure I feel any pain... :-) | > | > OK. Everytime someone goes "I've got usbfs loaded, and here is | > /proc/bus/usb/devices, but can't send you /proc/bus/usb/drivers", I'll assume | > that you two will answer the question. | > | > Helping people is hard. Please don't make it harder. :-( | | Personally, I've never used /proc/bus/usb/drivers. I've always just | looked at lsmod. | | Why should this be any different?
The only case I know of that's it been useful is to see why some USB driver failed registration -- because it's minor number(s) were already assigned/registered. That won't happen with just kernel.org stock drivers etc., of course. -- ~Randy ------------------------------------------------------- This sf.net email is sponsored by:ThinkGeek Welcome to geek heaven. http://thinkgeek.com/sf _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
