Messages in this thread | | | Date | Sun, 19 Feb 2006 01:06:04 -0500 | From | Phillip Susi <> | Subject | Re: Flames over -- Re: Which is simpler? |
| |
David Brownell wrote: > > Hardware is CORRECTLY reporting electrical disconnects, > but Philip is wanting Linux to ignore those reports. > >
No, not ignore, just realize that an electrical disconnection does not necessarily mean that the volume can no longer be accessed.
> > No patch possible. Reading the other messages in that > thread, Philip is advocating Linux ignore the USB spec. > (Which is what _he_ appears to have been doing...) >
Non sequitur. The USB spec does not say the kernel must force unmount the drive.
> What he has to do is more than submit a patch. He first > needs to lobby the USB-IF to change the USB spec, and > get every peripheral vendor to stop shipping USB devices > and instead switch over to "Philip-USB". Then get all > the billions of USB peripherals to go into the recycle > bin and be replaced with products conforming to his > new variant. It all seems highly unlikely. ;) > > > But yes, you're right ... if he's serious about > changing all that stuff, he also needs stop being a > member of the "never submitted a USB patch" club. > Ideally, starting with small things. >
You're moving off into left field.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |