On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Randy.Dunlap wrote: > On Mon, 25 Nov 2002, Johannes Erdfelt wrote: > | Why not just create a macro? > | > | #ifdef LINUX_VERSION_CODE < KERNEL_VERSION(2,5,0) > | #define usb_submit_urb(urb, flags) usb_submit_urb(urb) > | #endif > | > | Of course, the usual macro gotchas are implied. > > Hi Johannes, > > I like it. Will it work, using the same macro name, > or does a new macro name need to be used? >
That should work, but see further comments from Greg on 2.5 vs 2.4. It's more than just simple differences to worry about (id strings, that sort of thing -- non-opaque structs, and a few other function differences). It's probably better to just have seperate codebases at this point, it'll save time overall. If someone who knows the subsystem wants to do a complete emulation of 2.5's API for 2.4, more power to them =) 0x3 (my two bits) -- /jbm, but you can call me Josh. Really, you can! "What's a metaphor?" "For sheep to graze in" 7958 1C1C 306A CDF8 4468 3EDE 1F93 F49D 5FA1 49C4 > -- > ~Randy > > ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Get the new Palm Tungsten T handheld. Power & Color in a compact size! http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?palm0002en _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
