On Fri, Dec 22, 2006 at 12:46:06PM +0000, Phil Endecott wrote: > Greg KH wrote: > >> 3. The "lots of ioctls" design of usbfs seems unpopular with some and > >> searching the lists suggests that there may be other technical problems > >> with the current design, hence a proposed future "usbfs2". This will > >> be more like gadgetfs with one inode per endpoint. So is the current > >> usbfs "not recommended for new designs"? Is waiting for usbfs2 > >> suggested? Is there a useable usbfs2 patch available now? > > > > It's being slowly worked on. Right now it is a senior project for a > > college student, so it might be a while before it shows up in the tree. > > Or you are more than welcome to help out with the effort to get it > > moving faster.
I'm the college student working on the project (along with a couple other students). If you're interested in contributing to usbfs2, let me know. Sarah Bailey
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
------------------------------------------------------------------------- Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________ [email protected] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
