On Sun, 30 Sep 2018 at 00:57, Linus Torvalds
<torva...@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> On Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 2:47 PM Lubomir I. Ivanov <neolit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > random addresses should not be used on Win32.
>
> Afaik, the dive computers that need random addresses will simply not
> respond to the static ones.
>
> It's not a "choice" you can make. It's the other end that says that
> they need a random address.
>
> Now, it's possible that Windows does the selection automatically
> (that's how it *should* work, and Bluez is being stupid about it), but
> then it shouldn't matter whether you set the random address bit or
> not.
>

my suspicion was by raised by the earlier report by Steve, where i saw:
> qt_ble_open( 00:13:43:0D:DB:D4 )
> "The system cannot find the path specified."
> failed to connect to the controller  00:13:43:0D:DB:D4 with error "Remote 
> device cannot be found"

https://github.com/Subsurface-divelog/subsurface/blob/master/core/qt-ble.cpp#L406-L412

between our `qt_ble_open()` written to `stdout` and the
`controller->connectToDevice();`
we only have the `use_random_address()` which would result in true for Petrel.

so we might want to wrap that in #if define() for Windows just to test
it and be sure.

of course, the alternative here is that the address is wrong.

lubomir
--
_______________________________________________
subsurface mailing list
subsurface@subsurface-divelog.org
http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface

Reply via email to