On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 09:14:06AM -0700, Matthew Dharm wrote: > On Mon, Apr 19, 2010 at 04:58:55PM +0200, Stefan Assmann wrote: > > On 19.04.2010 16:19, Matthew Dharm wrote: > > > > > > 2) It is much much easier to update a userspace tool than the kernel. > > > Thus, new devices can be supported without a kernel update by end-users. > > > > Of course. Nobody is talking about removing existing code from any > > user-space application. Under the condition that no functionality gets > > lost, wouldn't it be convenient to have the modem exposed by the kernel? > > If the kernel support doesn't suffice you can still run an updated > > usb_modeswitch until kernel support is there. > > > > This also has the benefit that it would work for people that don't > > have usb_modeswitch installed. Matt, are you still thinking that is the > > wrong way of doing it? > > I still believe that, for an end-user, upgrading a userspace tool is much > much easier than upgrading a kernel. > > Also, the actual "driver" for the device (i.e. the modem part) doesn't need > an upgrade to the kernel component for these types of devices. > > Finally, these sorts of databases don't belong in the kernel as much as > possible. > > The usb-storage driver will not accept patches for device which can be > supported via userspace-only tools. And just to confirm, I support Matthew's position. thanks, greg k-h -- 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
