On Monday 14 of March 2005 06:02, Stephen Evanchik wrote:
> Here's the latest patch for TracKPoint devices. I have changed the
> sysfs filenames to be more descriptive for commonly used attributes. I
> also implemented the set_properties flag for initialization.
>
> It patches against 2.6.11 and
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 20:49:25 +0100, PaweÅ Sikora <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Monday 14 of March 2005 06:02, Stephen Evanchik wrote:
> > Here's the latest patch for TracKPoint devices. I have changed the
> > sysfs filenames to be more descriptive for commonly used attributes. I
> > also
On Tue, 15 Mar 2005 20:49:25 +0100, Pawe Sikora [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Monday 14 of March 2005 06:02, Stephen Evanchik wrote:
Here's the latest patch for TracKPoint devices. I have changed the
sysfs filenames to be more descriptive for commonly used attributes. I
also implemented the
On Monday 14 of March 2005 06:02, Stephen Evanchik wrote:
Here's the latest patch for TracKPoint devices. I have changed the
sysfs filenames to be more descriptive for commonly used attributes. I
also implemented the set_properties flag for initialization.
It patches against 2.6.11 and
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:40:22 -0500, Stephen Evanchik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 13:19:56 +0100, Vojtech Pavlik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > How much does it interpret the stream in non-transparent mode? Are
> > commands also passed through in soft transparent mode?
> >
> >
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 13:19:56 +0100, Vojtech Pavlik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How much does it interpret the stream in non-transparent mode? Are
> commands also passed through in soft transparent mode?
>
> I'm asking because we might want to implement a passthrough port
> similarly to what the
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 07:01:23AM -0500, Stephen Evanchik wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:19:49 +0100, Vojtech Pavlik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > +/*
> > > + * Mode manipulation
> > > + */
> > > +#define TP_SET_SOFT_TRANS (0x4E) /* Set mode */
> > > +#define TP_CANCEL_SOFT_TRANS (0xB9) /*
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:19:49 +0100, Vojtech Pavlik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > +/*
> > + * Mode manipulation
> > + */
> > +#define TP_SET_SOFT_TRANS (0x4E) /* Set mode */
> > +#define TP_CANCEL_SOFT_TRANS (0xB9) /* Cancel mode */
> > +#define TP_SET_HARD_TRANS (0x45) /* Mode can only be set */
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 12:02:13AM -0500, Stephen Evanchik wrote:
> Here's the latest patch for TracKPoint devices. I have changed the
> sysfs filenames to be more descriptive for commonly used attributes. I
> also implemented the set_properties flag for initialization.
>
> It patches against
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 12:02:13AM -0500, Stephen Evanchik wrote:
Here's the latest patch for TracKPoint devices. I have changed the
sysfs filenames to be more descriptive for commonly used attributes. I
also implemented the set_properties flag for initialization.
It patches against 2.6.11
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:19:49 +0100, Vojtech Pavlik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+/*
+ * Mode manipulation
+ */
+#define TP_SET_SOFT_TRANS (0x4E) /* Set mode */
+#define TP_CANCEL_SOFT_TRANS (0xB9) /* Cancel mode */
+#define TP_SET_HARD_TRANS (0x45) /* Mode can only be set */
What
On Mon, Mar 14, 2005 at 07:01:23AM -0500, Stephen Evanchik wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 09:19:49 +0100, Vojtech Pavlik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+/*
+ * Mode manipulation
+ */
+#define TP_SET_SOFT_TRANS (0x4E) /* Set mode */
+#define TP_CANCEL_SOFT_TRANS (0xB9) /* Cancel mode */
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 13:19:56 +0100, Vojtech Pavlik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How much does it interpret the stream in non-transparent mode? Are
commands also passed through in soft transparent mode?
I'm asking because we might want to implement a passthrough port
similarly to what the
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 08:40:22 -0500, Stephen Evanchik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2005 13:19:56 +0100, Vojtech Pavlik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How much does it interpret the stream in non-transparent mode? Are
commands also passed through in soft transparent mode?
I'm asking
On Monday 14 March 2005 00:02, Stephen Evanchik wrote:
> Here's the latest patch for TracKPoint devices. I have changed the
> sysfs filenames to be more descriptive for commonly used attributes. I
> also implemented the set_properties flag for initialization.
>
> It patches against 2.6.11 and
Here's the latest patch for TracKPoint devices. I have changed the
sysfs filenames to be more descriptive for commonly used attributes. I
also implemented the set_properties flag for initialization.
It patches against 2.6.11 and 2.6.11.3 however I have not tested it
with 2.6.11.3 .
Any comments
Here's the latest patch for TracKPoint devices. I have changed the
sysfs filenames to be more descriptive for commonly used attributes. I
also implemented the set_properties flag for initialization.
It patches against 2.6.11 and 2.6.11.3 however I have not tested it
with 2.6.11.3 .
Any comments
On Monday 14 March 2005 00:02, Stephen Evanchik wrote:
Here's the latest patch for TracKPoint devices. I have changed the
sysfs filenames to be more descriptive for commonly used attributes. I
also implemented the set_properties flag for initialization.
It patches against 2.6.11 and 2.6.11.3
18 matches
Mail list logo