not see any way to distinguish
between the two different types of devices that udev could use to tell
them apart.
Unless I am missing something this seems like a fatal flaw in the udev
paradigm.
Regards
Roy Rankin
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org
Le Jeu 31 octobre 2013 07:03, rran...@ihug.com.au a écrit :
I have run into an issue which seems to call into question the udev
paradigm for USB devices.
It's not a fatal flaw it's broken hardware (and autodetection broken by
device manufacturers not bothering to replace OEM id with their own
On 31/10/13 08:42, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
Le Jeu 31 octobre 2013 07:03, rran...@ihug.com.au a écrit :
I have run into an issue which seems to call into question the udev
paradigm for USB devices.
It's not a fatal flaw it's broken hardware (and autodetection broken by
device manufacturers not
On 31/10/13 09:56, Tom Hughes wrote:
so in short this device should be added to the greylist if it isn't
there already, and then it will only be probed when such a probe is
explicitly requested.
and the PL2303 is indeed in the greylist:
On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 11:52:18 +0100,
Florian Weimer fwei...@redhat.com wrote:
I might be missing something, but to me that seems just life with a
generic transport that doesn't have built-in identification of
connected devices. This applies to RS232 (your case), but also to
the (classic)
Once upon a time, rran...@ihug.com.au rran...@ihug.com.au said:
My USB GPS is a BU-353 which uses a pl2303 USB-Serial Controller
(idVendor=067b, idProduct=2303). However, bugzilla report 878737
indicates this same interface chip is used on other devices such as
RS232-USB adapters.
The PL2303
Can you wildcard the greylist so that modemmanager *never* runs? I
haven't used a modem in decades but MM keeps mucking with all my
serial-connected toys.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct:
and the output for
RS232 devices reported on the net, I do not see any way to distinguish
between the two different types of devices that udev could use to tell
them apart.
Unless I am missing something this seems like a fatal flaw in the udev
paradigm.
As the others have said, there's
On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 11:49 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
Can you wildcard the greylist so that modemmanager *never* runs? I
haven't used a modem in decades but MM keeps mucking with all my
serial-connected toys.
You can do anything you want with the udev rules. Just put them
in
But better yet, mind sharing which toys you have so we can update the
black/greylists as appropriate?
I make them myself using FTDI chips, usually, and they talk plain
RS-232 using terminal emulators and such:
http://www.delorie.com/electronics/
I also get a lot of eval boards with
something this seems like a fatal flaw in the udev
paradigm.
As the others have said, there's no way to determine what's sitting
behind those serial controllers so it's not a problem with udev but with
the hardware it has to handle. The default udev setting is, or at least
used
On Thu, 2013-10-31 at 13:08 -0400, DJ Delorie wrote:
But better yet, mind sharing which toys you have so we can update the
black/greylists as appropriate?
I make them myself using FTDI chips, usually, and they talk plain
RS-232 using terminal emulators and such:
On Thursday 31 October 2013 12:00:10 Dan Williams wrote:
If you're on a server, and that server does not
have any SMS me when you're down functionality, then you may not want
ModemManager installed there.
+1
But also in other cases, like the following:
* Software/hardware developer
13 matches
Mail list logo
