[asterisk-users] OT - Differences between modprobe and insmod

[Tzafrir Cohen]

On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 02:13:58AM +0100, Olivier wrote:
> hello,
> 
> Here (http://updates.xorcom.com/astribank/bristuff/1.4/INSTALL.html) you can
> read :
> 
> cd qozap
> modprobe zaptel
> insmod qozap.o (for kernel 2.4)
> insmod qozap.ko (for kernel 2.6)
> ztcfg

I should also point out that those are left-overs from the old INSTALL
page. They are under:

  === Manual Drivers Loading

  The following section is added unmodified from the original document. I
  don't really agree with it, though

This is nice for manually testing your installation. The problem with
that is that it tends to break on next reboot :-)

Older versions of qozap had issues with multiple runs of ztcfg. From
what I understnd, those issues have been resolved in recent versions.
This also reduces the level of voodoo required and allows easier
scripting.

> 
> I thought modprobe was a replacement for insmod.
> Can someone be kind enough to explain :
> 1. the difference between modprobe and insmod,

In this specific case I believe modprobe would have worked as well. Not
really sure.

> 2. why should both commands be issued,

Because qozap was not yet installed onto the system directory. Normally
you'd just run 'modprobe qozap' and it would also pull zaptel with it.

> 3. how modprobe and insmod compare with statements included in
> /etc/default/zaptel in Debian systems

An alternative for manual testing.

You forgot to mention /etc/modules on a Debian system, BTW.

-- 
               Tzafrir Cohen
icq#16849755              jabber:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
+972-50-7952406           mailto:tzafrir.cohen at xorcom.com
http://www.xorcom.com  iax:guest at local.xorcom.com/tzafrir