[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: libusual interface [was Re: libusual and ub]



On Mon, Dec 19, 2005 at 02:01:18PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
 > Pete Zaitcev (zaitcev redhat com) said: 
 > > > *Why* do they need the capability? Users *should not care* which
 > > > driver they use - if they do, one of them needs fixed.
 > > 
 > > Well, such is the theory, but in practice making an alternative driver
 > > to handle all cases creates an impossibly high barrier to entry.
 > > The common solution is to pass known-good devices from old driver to
 > > new driver (e.g. 8139too, e100). This is, unfortunately, impossible
 > > in case of USB storage.
 > 
 > That's what I'm asking - why is it impossible? We've turned off
 > things like eepro100, so I'm not sure why disabling usb-storage
 > for X, Y, and Z would be a problem. After all, anything left couldn't
 > be worse than firewire. :)

The most obvious one to me is things like eepro100 supported
about a dozen cards. usb-storage supports thousands of devices.
Whitelisting those isn't really practical.

		Dave


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]