On Monday 20 December 2004 01:37, Pete Zaitcev wrote: > On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:20:55 -0800, Matthew Dharm <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I can tell you that this has turned into the single largest source of bug > > reports/complaints about usb-storage. Something has to be done. I just > > don't know what. > > Is it that bad, really? Honestly, I could not imagine users can be so dumb. > The option defaults to off. There is a warning in the Kconfig. And yet they > first enable it and then complain about it. I don't know what to do about > it, either.
Its not that they just enable it. Its that it has side effects. I enable it to support one device - it then 'devnaps' other devices that usbstorage supports _much_ better. Is there some way it could work in reverse. eg. let ub bind only if usbstorage does not, possibly making usbstorage a _little_ more conservative if ub is present? Ed Tomlinson ------------------------------------------------------- SF email is sponsored by - The IT Product Guide Read honest & candid reviews on hundreds of IT Products from real users. Discover which products truly live up to the hype. Start reading now. http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/ _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
