Tim Waugh (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Wed, 1 Apr 1998 18:58:52 +0100 (BST)
On Wed, 1 Apr 1998, Riccardo Facchetti wrote:
> > At this point _not_ rejecting the status proc file in the parport proc
> > tree could be not wrong too.
> into the drive :) Anyway I agree with Tim that this new procfs file, if
> we decide to add it to the parport driver, should wait until 2.3.x.
That isn't really what I said though: I said that there may be a
/dev/parport0 in 2.3 which would allow a user-space program to read the
However (I now know), tunelp already does this via an lp ioctl, so this
whole thing is a non-issue. It has been possible for a LONG TIME to be
able to look at the status line in user-space, and we don't need to
implement new ways of doing it.
-- To unsubscribe, send mail to: email@example.com --
-- with the single word "unsubscribe" in the body of the message. --
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Wed 30 Dec 1998 - 10:17:34 EST