On Mon, Jan 08, 2001 at 10:38:31AM -0500, Heitzso wrote:
> so that's where the break occurred.
The problem was fixed (new interface don't allow
a bulk read to be more than PAGE_SIZE, often 4096 bytes)
Read the thread for more information.
You can download the fixed s10sh at
http://www.kyuzz.org/a
ECTED]]
Sent: Friday, January 05, 2001 1:01 PM
To: Heitzso
Cc: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'; 'Johannes
Erdfelt'
Subject: Re: USB broken in 2.4.0
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 12:38:25PM -0500, Heitzso wrote:
> I just tested with fresh-out-of-the-box
> 2
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001, antirez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 04:48:00PM -0800, Dunlap, Randy wrote:
> > This rings a small bell with me.
> > There was a change by Dan Streetman IIRC to limit
> > usbdevfs bulk transfers to PAGE_SIZE (4 KB for x86,
> > or 0x1000). Anything lar
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 04:48:00PM -0800, Dunlap, Randy wrote:
> This rings a small bell with me.
> There was a change by Dan Streetman IIRC to limit
> usbdevfs bulk transfers to PAGE_SIZE (4 KB for x86,
> or 0x1000). Anything larger than that returns
> an error (-EINVAL).
Yes, devio.c, proc_bul
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 03:39:36AM +0100, antirez wrote:
> s10sh reads 0x1400 bytes at once downloading jpges from the
> digicam, but the ioctl() that performs the bulk read fails with 2.4
> using this size. If I resize it (for example to 0x300) it works without
> problems (with high performace pe
ez
> Cc: Greg KH; Heitzso; '[EMAIL PROTECTED]';
> 'Johannes Erdfelt'
> Subject: Re: USB broken in 2.4.0
>
>
> On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 12:04:29AM +0100, antirez wrote:
> > I'll do some test with the new 2.4 kernel to find if there
> is a problem
>
On Sat, Jan 06, 2001 at 12:04:29AM +0100, antirez wrote:
> I'll do some test with the new 2.4 kernel to find if there is a problem
> in s10sh itself. A good test can be to try if the equivalent driver
> of gphoto works without problems using the 2.4 kernel (however it also
> uses the libusb). The
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 10:00:40AM -0800, Greg KH wrote:
> I made the same request to Jordan Mendelson yesterday, who has the same
> problem. Could you be so kind as to try to narrow down which kernel
> version this broke on? I have reports that it used to work on -test9
> but doesn't now. Coul
On Fri, Jan 05, 2001 at 12:38:25PM -0500, Heitzso wrote:
> I just tested with fresh-out-of-the-box
> 2.4.0 and using the newer libusb 0.1.2
> as suggested by antirez (see email chain
> below for more info). I compiled libusb
> and s10sh code this AM under 2.4.0.
>
> It blows up BAD by finding
On Mon, Jan 01, 2001, Heitzso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Johannes, I apologize for not getting back to you earlier.
> Holidays, a changing kernel, and work, kept me away from
> the test.
No problem.
> DATA: s10sh 0.1.9 is a program used to access the USB
> bus to get to digital cameras and dow
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000 at 04:33:26PM -0500, Heitzso wrote:
> I have a Canon usb camera that I access via a
> recent copy of the s10sh program (with -u option).
>
> Getting to the camera via s10sh -u worked through
> large sections of 2.4.0 test X but broke recently.
> I cannot say for certain wh
On Mon, Dec 18, 2000, Heitzso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I have a Canon usb camera that I access via a
> recent copy of the s10sh program (with -u option).
>
> Getting to the camera via s10sh -u worked through
> large sections of 2.4.0 test X but broke recently.
> I cannot say for certain wh
12 matches
Mail list logo
