Colin Watson: > On Wed, Feb 08, 2006 at 04:51:51PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > a friend tells me /etc/init.d/pcmcia start; outputs > > > > Starting PCMCIA services...cardmgr[2904]: no pcmcia driver in /proc/devices > > failed! > > > > on Linux 2.6.15. pcmciautils' message doesn't seem more confusing than > > pcmcia-cs'. Do you have a suggestion for improving pcmciautils' message? > > Well, I think mentioning pcmcia-cs in the pcmciautils message would > help. I'll make up some suitable wording and apply that shortly. > > In Ubuntu we just suppressed this message on boot (but not on > '/etc/init.d/pcmciautils start' etc.), which might help too.
I think this should be done for Debian too. I was planning to do it. I think /etc/init.d/pcmciautils should not output anything except if it's loading a bridge module in case it should say: Loading PCMCIA bridge driver module: i82365. This should only happen if udev hasn't already loaded a bridge module automatically. The point is that PCMCIA should be a part of the rest of the system and normally not need a specific init script to run to work. > The init scripts need to do different things, and I'd rather not have > the two packages depend on each other that way, at least not until we > have a pcmcia-common or similar. It's actually useful for the init > scripts to be separate I think - it means that we can discard a lot of > the old pcmcia-cs cruft (no offence, Per!) in the pcmciautils init > script and make it a lot more comprehensible. My plan is that pcmciautils will become the "common" package. pcmcia-cs already depends on it, I'm just going to have to move the /etc/pcmcia/config.opts generation stuff (which I'm planning to simplify, hopefully we won't need dmidecode). I agree that it's useful to discard the pcmcia-cs cruft, I don't like it either. -- Pelle -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
