On Saturday 08 July 2006 01:51, Michael Krufky wrote: > Andrew de Quincey wrote: > >I wonder.. is that "unable to get function XXX" message actually useful? > > If someone has intentionally disabled the frontends they don't need, they > > don't want to see a load of those for the modules they intentionally > > disabled. (some cards have 3 or 4 possible frontends, and the only way to > > tell which is to try each in turn). > > Wouldn't we only see this message if the frontendfoo_attach function was > called? This would only happen if a card is installed that needs a > frontend driver whose support is missing. So, if the message is going > to show, it would be for good reason. OK, fair enough. Now, how can we correct this for statically linked kernels with some frontends disabled? I suppose I could put a printk in the static inline function warning that the frontend is disabled? I can then adjust the demodulator .h files so that it only prints this message if the frontend is statically linked so we don't end up with TWO printouts (one from the demod, and one from dvb_attach()). With some adjustment, this would also allow the case where dvb_attach is disabled, but frontends are customised... currently this would fail silently as only dvb_attach() does the printout. _______________________________________________ linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
