>> The id is not suitable as a user space name. Moreover, >> it is a heuristic only, and user space needs unambiguous names.
> If we had a complete white/black list of devices with/without a unique id, > there would be no ambiguity. You mean for the devices on the white list. But most devices will not be on the white list. Our perceptions differ, I think. My impression is that chaos is the norm, and well-behaved devices are the exception. I find very good behaviour in fixed hard disks. Stuff by Maxtor, Seagate, IBM, etc - a very small collection of very experienced manufacturers with high quality products. SCSI CDROM drives or tape drives or scanners are messier. USB storage devices are much messier - very basic parts of the protocol are regularly broken. So to me the approach of an id together with a blacklist seems unworkable. As you say - we can make a best effort and get a string that with some luck identifies the device uniquely. But no guarantees given. Maybe that again means that the S/Z distinction can be dropped. Andries ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.NET email is sponsored by: SourceForge Enterprise Edition + IBM + LinuxWorld = Something 2 See! http://www.vasoftware.com _______________________________________________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
