>>Personally, I've never used /proc/bus/usb/drivers. I've always just >>looked at lsmod. >> >>Why should this be any different? > > Because lsmod only works for drivers that are modular. Real users mix built-in > and modules.
Wasn't someone -- Rusty? -- working an update to the module framework so 2.5 would be able to show all kernel modules, not just dynamically linked ones? And so something like their MODULE_NAME could be used in static tables as the driver name? Some 2.4 usb drivers disagreed with themselves on that issue. (Hotplug no longer has the table of exceptions it once had, it was error prone. But that also means it's more uncertain about system state than is necessary.) I'd be more keen to see that issue solved than keep the 'drivers' file. The question that hotplug wants to answer, for example, is "is this driver in the kernel". None of the 2.4 solutions for that were very trouble free. - Dave ------------------------------------------------------- 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
