From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 10:34:56 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 10:34:46 -0400 Received: from ppp0.ocs.com.au ([203.34.97.3]:10003 "HELO mail.ocs.com.au") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Tue, 26 Jun 2001 10:34:32 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.1.1 10/15/1999 From: Keith Owens To: Tim Waugh cc: Simon Huggins , lkml Subject: Re: parport_pc tries to load parport_serial automatically In-Reply-To: Your message of "Tue, 26 Jun 2001 14:53:55 +0100." <20010626145355.Z7663@redhat.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Wed, 27 Jun 2001 00:34:25 +1000 Message-ID: <11667.993566065@ocs3.ocs-net> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 26 Jun 2001 14:53:55 +0100, Tim Waugh wrote: >On Tue, Jun 26, 2001 at 11:37:19PM +1000, Keith Owens wrote: > >> "below parport_pc parport-serial" is even cleaner. One line, modprobe >> does everything else. > >Would this have any different effect than the current situation if >parport_serial fails to load? It behaves the same as an inter-module dependency, if parport-serial fails then parport_pc will not be loaded. If I remember correctly, this was suggested in the context that people who want both should put something in modules.conf, IOW this is what the user asked for.