Greg KH <greg@xxxxxxxxx> writes: >> When the 'mbm' driver is accepted upstream, the option.c patch is no >> longer required, and the VID/PID can be dropped from option.c. > > As that seems to not being anywhere close to happening yet, we'll just > leave this as-is for now :( Are there any other issues preventing this than 1) the naming scheme discussion 2) proper patch mail submission ? The other comments from Oliver Neukum seem to have been taken care of in the latest version of the driver. Although I guess nobody noticed because of the binary attachment :-) Carl, do you have any comments? How about splitting the naming issue out in a separate patch? Would the driver itself then be acceptable? Would this be acceptable to you, Carl? Even if the naming patch should be refused? If the naming really is confusing to end users, then I guess the major distributions will install udev rules to care of that. Such rules could also be bundled with the userspace tools, I guess. The important issue now, IMHO, is getting the driver out and tested. Bjørn -- You as flatulent as a braindamaged Honeywell dps8 lesbian fascist -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
