"David Z. Maze" wrote:
>
> Kent West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> KW> Is there a plain-english ("for dummies") page somewhere that
> KW> explains how modules work (modutils vs /etc/modules vs kmod vs
> KW> kerneld vs conf.modules vs modules.conf vs /etc/modutils/ vs auto
> KW> vs specific items i
Quoting Kent West ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> However, I don't have an "/etc/conf.modules" file on my system. I do
> have an "/etc/conf.modules.old" and an "/etc/modules.conf". So my basic
> question still stands. Which file is to be used? The documentation
> mentioned above says "conf.modules"; the fr
Kent West <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
KW> Is there a plain-english ("for dummies") page somewhere that
KW> explains how modules work (modutils vs /etc/modules vs kmod vs
KW> kerneld vs conf.modules vs modules.conf vs /etc/modutils/ vs auto
KW> vs specific items in /etc/modules vs compile-in vs Godz
>
> Can I delete my "/etc/conf.modules.old" file without worry?
>
yep, i have not had one for some time. There is no standard as of yet. When
the LSB (Linux Standards Base) gets ratified we may have to revisit this issue.
If documentation confuses you, please mail the maintainer and ask for t
Sean 'Shaleh' Perry wrote:
>
> > Can anyone verify that this is the case? Add any info? Which should I
> > use on my system? Do I have a choice? Is there a plain-english ("for
> > dummies") page somewhere that explains how modules work (modutils vs
> > /etc/modules vs kmod vs kerneld vs conf.modul
> Can anyone verify that this is the case? Add any info? Which should I
> use on my system? Do I have a choice? Is there a plain-english ("for
> dummies") page somewhere that explains how modules work (modutils vs
> /etc/modules vs kmod vs kerneld vs conf.modules vs modules.conf vs
> /etc/modutils/
6 matches
Mail list logo
