On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 09:12:53AM +1000, Brad Hards wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2002 07:39, Greg KH wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 16, 2002 at 08:00:53AM +1000, Brad Hards wrote:
> > > On Tue, 16 Apr 2002 02:54, Greg KH wrote:
> > > > If the structure is going to be exported from the kernel, then __u16
> > > > and __u32 should be used, as they are the proper types for this.  These
> > > > types are portable accross all platforms.
> > >
> > > They are not portable outside Linux. This is inappropriate in what needs
> > > to become a _standardised_ interface.
> >
> > Standardized across what?  Different OS's?  I'm not going down the UDI
> > rathole, been there before with the OpenUSBDI spec, and I don't want to
> > go back :)
> Settle down.

Heh, I'm not riled up, I just don't understand what you want.

> Right now, the USB Uninterruptable Power Supply people only do Linux, because 
> of Paul's work on hiddev. But applications like apcupsd and NUT are cross 
> platform - they have to be, because this stuff gets deployed in server rooms, 
> and the whole world is not Linux. There are moves to implement a hiddev style 
> interface for the *BSD people.
> The BSD guys helped us plenty - we shouldn't make their life hard now.

Great, I don't want to hurt them at all.  I'm all for helping them out.

But to shorten this message, user space should _not_ be including any
kernel space headers, end of story.  See Linus's postings on lkml about
this topic.

Because of this I don't really see what you want to change here.  What
would be changed in include/linux/hiddev.h that would help out
user space or any of the *BSD people?

thanks,

greg k-h

_______________________________________________
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To unsubscribe, use the last form field at:
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel

Reply via email to