| 1 |
On Sat, 20 Jun 2009 11:06:19 +0200, Dirk Heinrichs wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > I thought that,but reading the question again, I don't think the |
| 4 |
> > problem is naming, but the wrong driver claiming the card. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Naming makes the order irrelevant. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
True, but, depending on how you interpret the original question, it cold |
| 9 |
also mean that the wrong driver claiming the card means the interface |
| 10 |
doesn't come up. It all depends on how you interpret "this doesn't work", |
| 11 |
which isn't the most useful of descriptions. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
If it is simply a naming problem, then udev persistent names are the |
| 14 |
best solution, but I'm not sure that's the problem. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Perhaps the OP could clarify what is going wrong. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
After a few years in space, even Worf started to look good... |
Archives