[Nut-upsdev] [PATCH] few additions to the nut-usbups.rules

[Arnaud Quette]

Hi Stan,

2011/11/12 Arnaud Quette <aquette.dev at gmail.com>

> Hi Stan,
>
>
> 2011/11/2 Charles Lepple <clepple at gmail.com>
>
>> On Nov 2, 2011, at 2:06 PM, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
>>
>>  -       {            0x0001, 0x0000,  &krauler_subdriver },     /*
>>> Krauler UP-M500VA */
>>> -       {            0xffff, 0x0000,  &krauler_subdriver },     /*
>>> Ablerex 625L USB */
>>> +       { USB_DEVICE(0x0001, 0x0000), &krauler_subdriver },     /*
>>> Krauler UP-M500VA */
>>> +       { USB_DEVICE(0xffff, 0x0000), &krauler_subdriver },     /*
>>> Ablerex 625L USB */
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for the patch!
>>
>>
>> IMHO, we only want NUT to claim these invalid USB IDs if the user
>> specifically requests it, rather than including it in the base NUT
>> distribution (think Gstreamer's "ugly" vs "good" plugins.)
>>
>> Arnaud, do you think it is worthwhile to split this off into a second
>> udev/hotplug configuration file? (I ask since I think either you or someone
>> else at Eaton wrote the script that generates the .rules.in file).
>>
>
> well, sitting down to think for a minute, my original intention was just
> to not conflict with other "system" devices (I had in mind "Linux
> Foundation root hub").
> Digging back memories and the net, the only evidence I can find of
> possible conflict is ffff:0000 with some HID mice. Nothing for 0001:0000.
>
> So while it's true that these USB IDs are not conforming to USB standard,
> I don't actually see any need to keep these out of NUT udev rules anymore.
>
> Apart if someone prove me I'm wrong, I'm intending to revert r2994 and
> r2993 within a few days.
> Thanks for pointing my attention to this Stan!
>

Done in r3321.

cheers,
Arnaud
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/nut-upsdev/attachments/20111115/bf074a0e/attachment-0001.html>