On Mon, 31 May 2004, Dan Scholnik wrote: > Hi - > > Sorry to add to the Casio-induced headache, but... > > In february I sent in a patch to split the Casio QV entry in > unusual_devs.h into 2 entries, the first of which overrode both the > protocol and the subclass to work around what I assume are Casio bugs. > (Originally there was a single entry with the overrides, but later > Casios didn't need them and they were removed; I just reverted that > change for a certain range of cameras.) Now I find that the entry was > again "fixed" to remove the subclass override (patch as190); this again > breaks compatibility with the QV2000UX (device ID 0x9009). To remedy > this and try to avoid it happening a 3rd time, I offer the following > patch which gives the QV2000UX its very own entry. > > Dan Scholnik
The whole situation has been very confused. Your patch is out-of-date because it doesn't include the US_FL_NEED_OVERRIDE flag for revisions 0x1000 - 0x9008. Also, is it true that US_SC_8070 is correct (if unnecessary) for all the QV cameras? If it is, we could simply have a single entry for all revisions that would override both the subclass and protocol fields. Alan Stern ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Oracle 10g Get certified on the hottest thing ever to hit the market... Oracle 10g. Take an Oracle 10g class now, and we'll give you the exam FREE. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=3149&alloc_id=8166&op=click _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
