On Fri, Jun 04, 2004 at 06:07:49PM +0200, Harald Welte wrote: > yes, I dislike it, too. But as I'm not the original author and just > touched somebody else's code - I don't think I should change the overall > CodingStyle if I want that patch to get accepted by Dave Harding.
You should fix it if you want the patch to be accepted into the kernel tree :) > To be frank, I'm not sure whether I agree with the overall architecture > of USBMon, let aside it's coding style. Me either. > But AFAIK it is the only freely available usb sniffer available for > Linux, and that's why I'm using it. Hm, I started to add such a functionality to the usbfs code. Right now it logs any usbfs control urbs and basic "what did the user just ask to do" type messages. See the latest 2.6 kernel for it. You might want to start with that code and extend it to encompass the remaining usbfs calls. thanks, greg k-h ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the new InstallShield X. >From Windows to Linux, servers to mobile, InstallShield X is the one installation-authoring solution that does it all. Learn more and evaluate today! http://www.installshield.com/Dev2Dev/0504 _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
