Christer Weinigel ha scritto:
I think it is perfectly within their rights to do so. I think it's
kind of silly to try to hide it, if someone wants to boost the maximum
transmit power, they're going to hack the firmware anyway. But if it
makes Intel happy, well... :-)
And break the HW :-) Actua
David Newall ha scritto:
"Of course", because in many parts of the world, a device who's
manufacturer fails to take reasonable steps to prevent it from being
used outside regulatory limits is illegal. Providing source code not
only is a failure to take those reasonable steps, but is quite the
Duncan Sands wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> The problem is that I couldn't find the maintainer for the code
>> in drivers/usb/atm/.
>
> that would be me (though since I haven't used this modem in years I would
> be more than happy to hand it off to someone else).
>
>> Besides, I don't have a proper hardware
Hi Pavel,
> >> @@ -1014,11 +1015,7 @@ static int usbatm_do_heavy_init(void *arg)
> >>struct usbatm_data *instance = arg;
> >>int ret;
> >>
> >> - daemonize(instance->driver->driver_name);
> >>allow_signal(SIGTERM);
> >> - instance->thread_pid = current->pid;
> >> -
> >> - complete
Duncan Sands wrote:
> Hi Pavel,
>
@@ -1014,11 +1015,7 @@ static int usbatm_do_heavy_init(void *arg)
struct usbatm_data *instance = arg;
int ret;
- daemonize(instance->driver->driver_name);
allow_signal(SIGTERM);
- instance->thread_pid = current->pid;
I have connect aplux webcam to an isp1161A with a 2.6.23 kernel and
debug enabled.
I get this output:
116x: Enqueue: FA 2 ep2in bulk: len 4096/0
116x: Finish: FA 2 ep2in bulk: len 4096/4096
[repeated for 15 times]
116x: Enqueue: FA 2 ep2in bulk: len 4096/0
116x: Allowed or control data underrun
1
Sorry, excuse me for bad word. I have repost the message.
I have connect aplux webcam to an isp1161A with a 2.6.23 kernel and
debug enabled.
I get this output:
116x: Enqueue: FA 2 ep2in bulk: len 4096/0
116x: Finish: FA 2 ep2in bulk: len 4096/4096
[repeated for 15 times]
116x: Enqueue: FA 2 ep2i
- Add Support For AT&T 881U.
- I Have been testing patch for sometime with out any issues.
Signed-off-by: David Roth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
---
--- sierra.c 2008-01-28 05:52:14.0 -0600
+++ ../Working/sierra/sierra.c 2008-01-26 20:34:48.0 -0600
@@ -117,6 +117,7 @@
{ USB_DEVICE(0x1
Marcel Holtmann wrote:
>>> If the developers say that this symbol can only be used in GPL code (and
>>> with EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL it is quite clear) then you have to obey to that
>>> license or don't use this symbol at all.
>>>
Not sure who wrote the above, but it contains a glaring legal error
Alan Cox wrote:
>> If we're still talking about whether a kernel module is required to be
>> released under GPL, then yes, this is not a gray area. This is something
>> that authors of original works can decide for themselves. They have no
>>
^^^
>
> Onl
Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 09:44:36AM +1030, David Newall wrote:
>
>> A kernel module is akin to a process. It uses services of the kernel
>> without being part of the kernel.
>>
>
> No Linux does not work like this at all.
> ...
> Also see the various issues surrounding "lo
Chris Friesen wrote:
> if I were to write a new GPL shim and then a new closed-source module
> that uses the shim to access kernel symbols, it is entirely possible
> that a court could rule that my closed-source module is a derivative
> work of the linux kernel because it was written specifically t
Greg KH wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 09:14:48PM +0100, Christer Weinigel wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 5 Feb 2008 12:34:18 -0800
>> Greg KH <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> In the end, it's up to the copyright holders to enforce the license.
>>> And as I have stated in the past, a number of t
Christer Weinigel wrote:
> I also think that my customers, that decided to keep their kernel
> modules binary only, made a big mistake and have told them so. But I
> still think it's better for the Linux community to be a bit soft on
> such companies for a while. It's better to let them get away
Hi,
I am looking for CDC OBEX driver (USB gadget driver ). All my
searches have brought me to its host side counterpart which is now a
part of openobex as a user space library. However, i want the client
side driver which exposes CDC OBEX client side driver which exposes
CDC OBEX endpoints, clas
Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> I disagree here. They either play by the roles or they really do pay
> Microsoft or go with BSD. I really couldn't care less.
Then you should keep away from the kernel. The last thing that Linux
needs is someone who doesn't care if Linux succeeds or fails. "I don't
care"
Hans-Jürgen Koch wrote:
> If somebody prefers an other OS for license reasons only, let them. You
> cannot have open source software without open source license. If a
> company chooses Linux, they do it for technical reasons, and because
> they're able to modify the sources to suit their needs. Wha
Adrian Bunk wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 05:34:23PM -0600, Chris Friesen wrote:
>
>> David Newall wrote:
>>
>>> That being said, a module can be written such that it only dynamically
>>> links with the kernel. Ndiswrapper is an example of how this can be
>>> done: None of the drivers
Alan Cox wrote:
>> "Of course", because in many parts of the world, a device who's manufacturer
>> fails to take reasonable steps to prevent it from being used outside
>> regulatory limits is illegal. Providing source code not only is a failure
>> to take those reasonable steps, but is quite th
On Feb 6, 2008 6:42 PM, Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, Francis Moreau wrote:
>
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm wondering what this option means and in which cases it's needed.
> >
> > Thanks for any hint.
>
> Read the documentation at the top of the source file:
> drivers/usb/ga
Hi David,
On Feb 7, 2008 3:31 PM, David Newall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> This *is* real work. You have blinded yourself to the fact that this
> discussion is preliminary to a proposed change.
>
> Or put another way, if you want to kill the discussion then the answer
> to "shall we" is "no."
O
Marcel Holtmann wrote:
>>> if a new drivers is originally written for Linux, then you are breaking
>>> the GPL.
>>>
>> Completely wrong. However if the driver is distributed as built-in, then it
>> would need to be licensed under GPL. This means that a driver can be
>> written and distri
Greg KH wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 10:09:07PM +1030, David Newall wrote:
>
>> Marcel Holtmann writes:
>>
>>> if a new drivers is originally written for Linux, then you are breaking
>>> the GPL.
>>>
>> Completely wrong. However if the driver is distributed as built-in, then
>>
Pekka Enberg wrote:
> I have simply stated that (1) the problem boils down to what is
> derived work and what is no and (2) the developers use the
> EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL as a hint of what they think to be derived work (not
> necessarily tested in court). The _logical conclusion_ of these two
> simple
Diego Zuccato wrote:
> David Newall ha scritto:
>
>> "Of course", because in many parts of the world, a device who's
>> manufacturer fails to take reasonable steps to prevent it from being
>> used outside regulatory limits is illegal. Providing source code not
>> only is a failure to take those re
Chris Friesen wrote:
> Marcel Holtmann wrote:
>
>> If the developers say that this symbol can only be used in GPL code (and
>> with EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL it is quite clear) then you have to obey to that
>> license or don't use this symbol at all.
>>
>> If you use that symbol inside non-GPL (meaning you
Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi David,
>
>
>>> I think you're missing my point: as long as the license stays the way
>>> it is now, you can never distribute proprietary code unless you've
>>> consulted a lawyer and even then you run the risk of being sued for
>>> infringement if the copyright holder
Alan Cox wrote:
>> In Australia, devices require approval from a regulatory body. Such
>> approval is withheld if appropriate safeguards are not applied.
>>
>
> We were talking about the USA.
We most certainly were not. We are talking about Linux, and everybody
wants it be used globally.
>
Alan Cox wrote:
>> The contract (GPL) doesn't prevent me from using GPL work, in fact it
>> encourages me. Neither can it impose conditions upon original work
>> authored by a third party.
>>
>
> First mistake: The GPL is not a contract it is a license.
Mea culpa. It is indeed a licence, whi
Alan Cox wrote:
>> Again, I missed who wrote the above. I'm reminded of Apple computer,
>> who explaining some engineering decisions in the Apple ][ pointed out
>> that an additional 10c in components adds $10 to the retail price (or
>> something rather like that.) Cheap, cheap, cheap helps mark
> previous statements which seemed to say, "you've spoken to numerous
Please don't use "seemed to say" and then quote words I've never said.
That's misleading, rude and also awful language style. I've not said
anything is definite because as I said before there is no caselaw.
We know the GPL is e
On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 09:07:38AM +0100, Diego Zuccato wrote:
> Christer Weinigel ha scritto:
>...
> [...]
>> preliminary go ahead from the bosses to provide documentation under an
>> NDA to Linux developers that would like to write GPL drivers for it. I
> [...]
> Urgh... I don't think NDAs and O
Alan Stern wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
>
>>> Does the kthread API guarantee that the kthread is not running until you
>>> call
>> It does. That's why the race, you mentioned above is impossible.
>
> That is wrong. The API guarantees only that the kthread is initially
>
On Wed, 6 Feb 2008, James Bottomley wrote:
> > Did you mean scsi_kmap_atomic_sg()?
>
> Yes .. I replied from memory rather than looking in the source.
>
> > That appears to do only part of
> > what usb_stor_access_xfer_buf() does. In fact, all it does is map a
> > single page.
>
> Um, it doe
Alan Cox wrote:
>> previous statements which seemed to say, "you've spoken to numerous
>>
>
> Please don't use "seemed to say" and then quote words I've never said.
> That's misleading, rude and also awful language style.
No, it's called, "paraphrasing," and it's quite normal in a
conversatio
Alan Cox wrote:
>> No, I'm right. The word "proof" is appropriate in context. (I write in
>> plain English, not Legalese.) I certainly didn't intend "proof" to mean
>> "mathematically certain." Anybody who pretends that proof in court
>> means that must be ignorant or trying to deceive.
>>
Am Fri, 08 Feb 2008 03:20:26 +1030
schrieb David Newall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hans-Jürgen Koch wrote:
> > Am Fri, 08 Feb 2008 01:01:24 +1030
> > schrieb David Newall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >
> >>> It is not legally meaningless if copyright holders publicly state
> >>> how they interpret the li
On Feb 7, 2008 6:29 PM, Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Francis Moreau wrote:
>
> > On Feb 7, 2008 5:49 PM, Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > sb-storage: Command MODE_SENSE (6 bytes)
> > > > usb-storage: 1a 00 3f 00 c0 00
> > > > usb-storage: Bulk Command S
On Wed, Feb 06, 2008 at 05:01:33PM -0800, Kevin Lloyd wrote:
> Hi Greg & Bruno,
>
> As you can probably tell the Sierra driver is becoming less and less
> generic and more Sierra device specific. I am not sure if we want to
> include non-sierra devices in this driver, as I am not sure whether our
On Tue 5 Feb 2008 14:56, Robin Getz pondered:
> I was wondering where (or if) there were any non-mainlined gadget
> drivers that
> were kept anywhere?
>
> According to (2005)
> http://www.linux-usb.org/gadget/
>
> > Other controller and gadget drivers are in development, but are
> > unreleased
Great.
The only devices that I am aware of that have been submitted that are
not Sierra Wireless devices are:
- Onda H600/Zte MF330 (0x05C6, 0x6613) (from Bruno Redondi)
- Kyocera Wireless KPC680 (0x0c88, 0x180a) (from Dan Williams)
We could probably move the Kyocera KPC650 from the airprime driv
Hi David,
> >>> I think you're missing my point: as long as the license stays the way
> >>> it is now, you can never distribute proprietary code unless you've
> >>> consulted a lawyer and even then you run the risk of being sued for
> >>> infringement if the copyright holder thinks what you have i
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Nate Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I've got a Dell wireless 5520 card with a different USB ID - specifically, 8136
instead of 8137. Attached a small patch to add support, and the output of an
'a
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Oliver Neukum <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
this function will run in the context of the scsi error handler thread.
It must use GFP_NOIO instead of GFP_KERNEL to avoid a possible
deadlock.
Signed-off-b
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Ed Beroset <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Added support for the Elster Unicom III Optical Probe.
The device ID has already been added to the usb.ids file.
Signed-off-by: Ed Beroset <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
S
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Daniel Koz??k <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Remove entry for Huawei E620 UMTS/HSDPA card (ID: 12d1:1001) in pl2303 driver
Option driver is use instead
Signed-off-by: Daniel Koz??k <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
S
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Craig Shelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Six new device IDs for CP2101 driver.
Signed-off-by: Craig Shelley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: G
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Alan Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
If we get a data URB back from the hardware after we have put the tty to
bed we go kaboom. Fortunately all we need to do is process the URB
without trying to ram i
And it's a logical problem, too: why should the *driver* enforce a
*technical* limit?
That's part of it's purpose. It permits a manufacturer to make a global
device that operates within local restrictions.
--
Then the hardware vendor needs to review there practices. If you want
to
On Thu, Feb 07, 2008 at 11:52:46AM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Fabio Venturi wrote:
>
> > I don't see any USB quirk in dmesg,
> > the initd file is rebuilt every time I change
> > something in the kernel with mkinitcpio on ArchLinux.
> >
> > The patched quirks.c is:
> ...
> > s
> It would not be improper to say that "such and such a lawyer said this
> and that." I'm not proposing that you breach their copyright in their
It would be highly improper given these were business discussions
involving companies using Linux.
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsu
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Fabio Venturi wrote:
> I don't see any USB quirk in dmesg,
> the initd file is rebuilt every time I change
> something in the kernel with mkinitcpio on ArchLinux.
>
> The patched quirks.c is:
...
> static const struct usb_device_id usb_quirk_list[] = {
> /* Action Semico
Hans-Jürgen Koch wrote:
> Am Fri, 08 Feb 2008 01:01:24 +1030
> schrieb David Newall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>>> It is not legally meaningless if copyright holders publicly state
>>> how they interpret the license and what they consider a license
>>> violation.
>>>
>> Copyright-holders' op
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Francis Moreau wrote:
> I'm trying to port a custom hardware with an embedded UDC.
>
> It works so far but I need to pass "stall=0" option to make the mass
> storage driver work with a windows XP host although the HW can stall
> any endpoints in theory.
Well, either the theor
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Hans-Jürgen Koch
> Sent: 2008 February 07 16:13
> To: David Newall
> Cc: Christer Weinigel; Marcel Holtmann; Diego Zuccato; Greg
> KH; linux-usb@vger.kernel.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: [PATCH
Alan Cox wrote:
>> That's what you claim it says, but has any court, anywhere, agreed with
>> you? You claim the authority of others (i.e. numerous lawyers), but I
>> don't believe you have that authority. You're just starting hearsay.
>> You've never said what lawyers and you've never told us w
Alan Cox wrote:
>> It's nonsense, it's a reasonable reading of the GPL. What I am doing is
>> telling you what the GPL says, not what you wish it said.
>>
>
> In which case for each statement please give the case at appeal or higher
> level which is the precedent for the interpretation.
>
Diego Zuccato wrote:
> David Newall ha scritto:
>
>> That's naive, since requirements differ in different jurisdictions, as
>> I'm sure you are perfectly aware.
> Naive? Who thinks a limit can be enforced by sw is naive!
Of course. Naturally it's near impossible to prevent people from
tweaking th
Alan Cox wrote:
>> No. Holders of Linux copyrights would have to prove that the
>> proprietary code is derived from the kernel. They have the burden of
>> proof, and defence needs merely show that their arguments are wrong.
>>
>
> Wrong again. In civil law in the USA and most of europe the t
> No, I'm right. The word "proof" is appropriate in context. (I write in
> plain English, not Legalese.) I certainly didn't intend "proof" to mean
> "mathematically certain." Anybody who pretends that proof in court
> means that must be ignorant or trying to deceive.
I'm afraid you are wrong d
> That's what you claim it says, but has any court, anywhere, agreed with
> you? You claim the authority of others (i.e. numerous lawyers), but I
> don't believe you have that authority. You're just starting hearsay.
> You've never said what lawyers and you've never told us what they
> actually
Alan Cox wrote:
>>> IANAL, but when looking at the "But when you distribute the same
>>> sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the
>>> distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License" of the
>>> GPLv2 I would still consult a lawyer before e.g. selling a
> It's nonsense, it's a reasonable reading of the GPL. What I am doing is
> telling you what the GPL says, not what you wish it said.
In which case for each statement please give the case at appeal or higher
level which is the precedent for the interpretation.
> > If the developers say that this
Hans-Jürgen Koch wrote:
> Am Thu, 07 Feb 2008 23:49:42 +1030
> schrieb David Newall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>> Nobody is saying "I don't like your licence." The issue is a
>> technical restriction in Linux that attempts to restrict non-GPL
>> software from running under it.
>>
>
> What ar
David Newall ha scritto:
That's naive, since requirements differ in different jurisdictions, as
I'm sure you are perfectly aware.
Naive? Who thinks a limit can be enforced by sw is naive!
He's missing a little detail: Internet. :-)
Precisely: One purpose of the driver is to enforce local comp
> > IANAL, but when looking at the "But when you distribute the same
> > sections as part of a whole which is a work based on the Program, the
> > distribution of the whole must be on the terms of this License" of the
> > GPLv2 I would still consult a lawyer before e.g. selling a laptop with a
> doesn't mean it's derived from Linux. In the case of user-space code
> it's widely understood that no licence restrictions are conferred. The
Actually that is also questionable. The only reason it is fairly certain
in Linux is Linus went to the trouble of stating that interpretation was
intend
> Perhaps you might read up on unfair trade practices and contract law.
I'm familiar with them to some extent because I have run companies in the
past and continue to do so as a sideline to my Red Hat work. I also spend
more time than I'd like talking to lawyers about licencing.
> The contract (
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Peter Stark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I work with a group of people on a free home automation tool called
FHEM. Some of the users own more than one USB-serial device by ELV. The
ftdi_sio driver has
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Kevin Lloyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The following improvements were made:
- Added new product support: MC5725, AC 880 U, MP 3G (UMTS & CDMA)
Signed-off-by: Kevin Lloyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Damien Stuart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
This simply adds the "YC Cable" as a vendor and its pl2303-based
USB<->Serial adapter as a product. This particular adapter is sold by
Radio Shack. I've don
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Jessica L. Blank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Adds the appropriate vendor and device IDs for the AirCard 881U to
sierra.c. (This device is often rebadged by AT&T as the USBConnect 881).
Signed-off-by:
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Li Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
For fsl_usb2_udc driver, ep0 also has a descriptor. Current code is
misleading and contains a logical mistake. Here is the patch to fix it.
http://bugzilla.kern
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Grant Grundler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Add "FIX_CAPACITY" entry for HP Photosmart r707 Camera in "Disk" mode.
Camera will wedge when /lib/udev/vol_id attempts to access the last sector,
EIO gets r
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Franco Lanza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
little patches only to add vendor/device id of ATK_16IC CCD cam for
astronomy.
From: Franco Lanza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[EMAI
Hi Diego,
> > I think it is perfectly within their rights to do so. I think it's
> > kind of silly to try to hide it, if someone wants to boost the maximum
> > transmit power, they're going to hack the firmware anyway. But if it
> > makes Intel happy, well... :-)
> And break the HW :-) Actually,
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Stefan Bader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
The device setup did miss to initialize the num_interrupt_out field, thus
failing to successfully complete the probe function.
Signed-off-by: Stefan Bader <[E
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Fabio Venturi wrote:
> > No, no! Please use the patch in the form I sent to you. The
> > USB_DEVICE macro should say:
> >
> > USB_DEVICE(0x10d6, 0x2200)
>
> Right, network byte order
Not really. You could just as well have written them as 4310 and 8704,
(except that
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Francis Moreau wrote:
> On Feb 7, 2008 5:49 PM, Alan Stern <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > sb-storage: Command MODE_SENSE (6 bytes)
> > > usb-storage: 1a 00 3f 00 c0 00
> > > usb-storage: Bulk Command S 0x43425355 T 0x6 L 192 F 128 Trg 0 LUN 0 CL 6
> > > usb-storage: usb_stor
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Thomi Aurel RUAG A wrote:
> Hi
>
> > Does this explanation help?
> Yes, any explanation about the mechanisme of the processing of an usb transfer
> will get me further on my understandings.
>
> > It _starts_ to handle the class request. If the request
> > involves a data-OUT
Hi all,
Is any one doing any work on the latest Belkin USB Host-to-Host Easy
Transfer cable (F5U258) under Linux?
I have one and it has the Prolific 25A1 chip in it (found by opening it
up,) with a Vendor VID of 0x050D and Product ID of 0x258A.
I added these to the plusb.c file under 2.6.23.14-1
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Pavel Emelyanov wrote:
> > Does the kthread API guarantee that the kthread is not running until you
> > call
>
> It does. That's why the race, you mentioned above is impossible.
That is wrong. The API guarantees only that the kthread is initially
created in a non-running s
Am Fri, 08 Feb 2008 01:01:24 +1030
schrieb David Newall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > It is not legally meaningless if copyright holders publicly state
> > how they interpret the license and what they consider a license
> > violation.
>
> Copyright-holders' opinions mean nothing. In the particular
On Tuesday 05 February 2008, Robin Getz wrote:
> I was wondering where (or if) there were any non-mainlined gadget drivers
> that
> were kept anywhere?
Nowhere central ... as in, submitted to kernel.org for kernel code,
or [EMAIL PROTECTED] for userspace.
> According to (2005)
> http://www.lin
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 02:12:06PM -0800, David Brownell wrote:
> On Wednesday 30 January 2008, Sarah Sharp wrote:
> > Hi Dave,
> >
> > I've been looking at ehci_shutdown() in ehci-hcd.c with increasing
> > puzzlement.
> > Why shut off port power before attempting to stop the host controller from
> Again, I missed who wrote the above. I'm reminded of Apple computer,
> who explaining some engineering decisions in the Apple ][ pointed out
> that an additional 10c in components adds $10 to the retail price (or
> something rather like that.) Cheap, cheap, cheap helps market share
> far more
Am Dienstag, 5. Februar 2008 08:36:01 schrieb Clemens Ladisch:
> > Documentation/DocBook/writing-an-alsa-driver, section
> > "RawMIDI Interface".
> >
> > Just use the *_open/*_close and *_disconnect callbacks.
>
> Sorry, what I wrote isn't true for input because the driver uses an
> active URB reg
Alan Cox wrote:
>> I heard this all before and I don't buy it anymore. At some point the
>> companies in Asia will understand that the whole picture looks different
>> and that not always cheap, cheap, cheap is best for their margins.
Again, I missed who wrote the above. I'm reminded of Apple com
Am Thu, 07 Feb 2008 23:49:42 +1030
schrieb David Newall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Hans-Jürgen Koch wrote:
> > If somebody prefers an other OS for license reasons only, let them.
> > You cannot have open source software without open source license.
> > If a company chooses Linux, they do it for techni
On Fri, Feb 08, 2008 at 12:51:22AM +0200, Hannu Savolainen wrote:
> Alan Cox kirjoitti:
>>> doesn't mean it's derived from Linux. In the case of user-space code
>>> it's widely understood that no licence restrictions are conferred. The
>>>
>>
>> Actually that is also questionable. The only r
> In Australia, devices require approval from a regulatory body. Such
> approval is withheld if appropriate safeguards are not applied.
We were talking about the USA. I am not aware of any Australian answers
to the specific question of software as an appropriate safeguard. The US
requires appropr
On Tue, Feb 05, 2008 at 01:30:23PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Feb 2008, Fabio Venturi wrote:
>
> > Opppsss!!!
> > Too many outputs to deal with :(
> > I'm not sure that was right,
> > this is right one for sure:
> >
> > + { USB_DEVICE(0x10d6, 0x2200), .driver_info = USB_QUIRK_STRING_FET
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Bruno Redondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Added support for Onda H600/Zte MF330 GPRS/UMTS/HSDPA datacard
Signed-off-by: Bruno Redondi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[EMAIL PRO
Hi David,
> > I disagree here. They either play by the roles or they really do pay
> > Microsoft or go with BSD. I really couldn't care less.
> Then you should keep away from the kernel. The last thing that Linux
> needs is someone who doesn't care if Linux succeeds or fails. "I don't
> care" wi
Alan Cox kirjoitti:
doesn't mean it's derived from Linux. In the case of user-space code
it's widely understood that no licence restrictions are conferred. The
Actually that is also questionable. The only reason it is fairly certain
in Linux is Linus went to the trouble of stating that i
On Tue, Jan 22, 2008 at 07:52:57PM +, Christian Schoenebeck wrote:
> Am Dienstag, 22. Januar 2008 16:27:33 schrieben Sie:
> > Hm, exactly how the usbfs2 endpoints are exported, right? :)
>
> I guess so, because what I'm trying to do is merely just to expose some of
> the
> device's (interru
2.6.24-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let us know.
--
From: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Some crazy devices in the wild have a vendor id of 0x. If we try to
add a module alias with this id, we just can't do it due to a check in
the file2a
> > Redirecting stderr and stdout of 'lsusb -v' I get the following details.
> > Note: the device restart if it get probed with 'lsusb -v'
> >
> >
> > Bus 001 Device 011: ID 10d6:2200 Actions Semiconductor Co., Ltd
> > Device Descriptor:
> > bLength18
> > bDescriptorType
On Mon, Feb 04, 2008 at 03:23:14PM -0500, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Mon, 4 Feb 2008, Oliver Neukum wrote:
>
> > Am Montag, 4. Februar 2008 16:36:51 schrieb Alan Stern:
> >
> > > That's because you don't bind usbfs to a device through sysfs. You
> > > bind it by running a program that calls the USB
On Thu, 7 Feb 2008, Fabio Venturi wrote:
> > > Redirecting stderr and stdout of 'lsusb -v' I get the following details.
> > > Note: the device restart if it get probed with 'lsusb -v'
> > >
> > >
> > > Bus 001 Device 011: ID 10d6:2200 Actions Semiconductor Co., Ltd
> > > Device Descriptor:
> >
1 - 100 of 117 matches
Mail list logo
