Am Mittwoch, 11. Januar 2012, 11:56:37 schrieb Markus Kolb: > On Wed, 11 Jan 2012 11:35:16 +0100, Oliver Neukum wrote: > > Am Mittwoch, 11. Januar 2012, 11:29:57 schrieb Markus Kolb: > >> Is it really a broken union descriptor? > >> There is all information but the original cdc_ether code can only > >> handle union descriptor which starts with 0. > >> That is something e.g. the Windows driver can handle. > > > > Possibly cdc-ether is also broken, but the descriptor refers to > > interfaces > > 4 and 5 which don't exist. > > > > Regards > > Oliver > > Ok. You're right, I've reminded. > Is there another way to get the correct interface numbers or is the > defensive guess of my patch ok?
The interface association descriptor has the correct interfaces. I am not sure it is a valid thing to fall back to it. Regards Oliver -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org