Hi, On Freitag 18 März 2011, Michael Bender wrote: [...] > > So if the driver is called with "usb:08e6/3437:foobar:xyz:123" the > > driver should just ignore the part it can't parse and just use > > "usb:08e6/3437" or even nothing at all. But the driver should not fail > > just because it does not know the naming scheme. > > Why should the CCID driver be responsible for knowing about all the > different > USB access methods? How about if pcscd provided an abstraction that > would > give the CCID driver access to do basic I/O to USB and let pcscd > manage whatever > the current USB access scheme is at the moment? [...]
I guess we are quite close to that: Currently most - if not all - drivers use libusb on Linux (and maybe on other systerms as well). Or at least they can determine the device when given the USB bus address of the device. So for me it would really suffice to just use the libusb naming scheme instead of changing the naming scheme every once in a while (i.e. whenever there is a new hardware abstraction layer). Having the libusb address is enough even if pcscd uses HAL to detect new readers. It shouldn't matter to the driver how pcscd detects new readers. It should just tell the driver which USB device is to be used, and for that the USB address as used in the libusb naming scheme really is enough and quite universal. Regards Martin -- "Things are only impossible until they're not" Martin Preuss - http://www2.aquamaniac.de/ AqBanking - http://www.aqbanking.de/ LibChipcard - http://www.libchipcard.de/ _______________________________________________ Muscle mailing list [email protected] http://lists.drizzle.com/mailman/listinfo/muscle
