Now that 2.4.0 has actually been released, we kind of have an
obligation not to break /proc/sys/dev/parport/parport0/autoprobe
(again!). So, which of the changes you proposed would be okay I
On Sun, Dec 24, 2000 at 07:01:20PM -0800, Adam J. Richter wrote:
> 1. A device's IEEE-1284.3 ID is now reread from hardware whenever
> the corresponding /proc/sys/dev/parport*/parport* file is read.
> However, the results are still stored in struct parport for now
> so that each driver does not have to requery each parallel port
> device. At some point in the future, parport probably should
> get a registration interface similar to the new PCI interface and
> the USB interface where some centrally-called routine does all
> of the matching and tells the drivers which devices they match.
This is probably okay, so long as it claims the port.
> 2. The printer ID parsing code has been replaced.
> /proc/sys/dev/parport*/parport* now return the IEEE-1284.3 string
> verbatim, including length bytes, whether they are correct or not.
> The only processing done is that a new line is added to the end.
> So, for example, you can now write a program to test if your
> printer is providing an incorrect length value, not including
> a semicolon, etc.
This is an incompatible change and so can't go in. :-(
However, if we lose the two length bytes and do the rest it should be
-- To unsubscribe, send mail to: firstname.lastname@example.org --
-- with the single word "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. --
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Jan 15 2001 - 11:58:51 EST