on 15/10/2009 13:15 Andriy Gapon said the following: > There is the following note in that manual page: > cam_open_device() is rather simple > to use, but it is not really suitable for general use because its behav‐ > ior is not necessarily deterministic. Programmers writing new applica‐ > tions should make the extra effort to use one of the other open routines > documented below. > But I am not sure now valid it is. Because I can't imagine that it is > principally > impossible to put the same code into libcam that a programmer would put in > his > code. I.e. I don't think that I could do cdX to passX any smarter than > cam_open_device does it. And if I could, then I'd rather put that code into > cam_open_device anyway, so that everyone could benefit from it.
BTW, I talked to Scott Long about this note and he said that it is about the case when the path provided is not a full path, i.e. just "cd0". And it comes from pre-devfs MAKEDEV days, when one could have /dev/cd0 and /mydev/cd0 devices and they would refer to different physical devices. Nowadays, it should be entirely safe to use cam_open_device(). -- Andriy Gapon _______________________________________________ kde-freebsd mailing list kde-freebsd@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-freebsd See also http://freebsd.kde.org/ for latest information
