Re: Missing Edgeport USB driver in recent kernels
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 07/09/08 22:16, Don wrote:
> Ron Johnson wrote:
>
>> On 07/09/08 20:41, Don wrote:
>>> I hope someone can shed some light on my situation...assistance will be
>>> greatly appreciated. Nice to see a lot of helpful old timers still on
>>> this discussion list -- your help in the past has been appreciated.
>>>
>>> I recently reinstalled Debian Lenny on my computer (long story, don't
>>> ask) and in the process updated the kernel (previously 2.6.18) to
>>> 2.6.22. I discovered last week that my Edgeport/8 USB to RS232 box no
>>> longer works under Debian (but still works under Win2k). Investigating,
>>> I found the io_edgeport.ko driver missing from 2.6.22 and even
>>> 2.6.25-2-686 on the Debian package web pages. It apparently appeared
>>> last in kernel 2.6.18.
>>>
>>> Why was this driver left out from the newer kernels?
>>>
>>> I do find the source files for io_edgeport.c and io_edgeport.h under the
>>> /lib/modules/2.6.22-3-686/kernel/drivers/usb/serial/ directory.
>>
>> Are you really asking is why it was not compiled in the binary kernel?
>
> Yes, that is one of my questions. It had been compiled in the binary
> kernel before, but apparently dropped after 2.6.18. I read at one place
> someone was proposing it was some kind of Debian policy violation.
>
>> What happens if you "# insmod -v io_edgeport"?
>
> kali:/home/don# insmod -v io_edgeport
> insmod: can't read '-v': No such file or directory
> kali:/home/don# insmod io_edgeport -v
> insmod: can't read 'io_edgeport': No such file or directory
Sorry, that's "# modprobe -v io_edgeport". I always like the
verbose option because it aids in failure debugging.
- --
Ron Johnson, Jr.
Jefferson LA USA
"Kittens give Morbo gas. In lighter news, the city of New New
York is doomed."
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAkh1u8MACgkQS9HxQb37XmcyBwCcCGJqedSxzBtVPorLE1nhOfWM
PSEAnjxM4PPHOVQRHNhgXuDn93HBXBIf
=4hYK
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Reply to: