On Sat, 8 Oct 2005 19:14:13 -0700, Matthew Dharm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> But, I'm not sure this is much better. It's certainly different, but I > fear that we're going to spend a lot of time explaining to end-users a new > and less-than-totally-obvious system. Devices continue to default to usb-storage, regardless if libusual is configured. So, no explanations should be necessary at first. Fedora may be different if we like how it works in Rawhide and let it into a release. Then I would talk to Karsten about documenting this in Fedora handbook. Although... I may be missing something about the behaviour of end users. I thought that what we had before was transparent, but I was wrong. I have some hopes for Gentoo users to tell me if libusual is workable actually. They like to try new options as soon as they appear :-) > And I think I'm totally convinced now that request_module() needs some > serious help. [] I think maybe if this use of it gets visible, it may be easier to implement changes to request_module(), than if I were just mailing to linux-kernel. Patch always speaks louder than words. Maybe Keith or Rusty will have a look and bust this to bits, from the module-init-tools perspective. -- Pete ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
