Pat LaVarre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >>>> P: Vendor=10d6 ProdID=1100 Rev= 1.00 >>>> ... >>>> P: Vendor=054c ProdID=019d Rev= 1.00 >>>> >>> >>> These appear to be instances of USB idProduct: idVendor: bcdDevice >>> >> >> I didn't follow what you meant. Please explain. > > I can explain better if you can give me the URL of an archive of the > original patch?
http://www.ussg.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/0509.3/1324.html > The basic idea is that a patch for idVendor=x054C idProduct=x0000- > x9999 can instead be a patch for just idVendor=x054C idProduct=x019D > if we have reason to believe that only idVendor=x054C idProduct=x019D > was observed to need the patch. Well but 054c:019d isn't the device needing the fix. The previous device is the one. As you can see on the patch. -- O T A V I O S A L V A D O R --------------------------------------------- E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] UIN: 5906116 GNU/Linux User: 239058 GPG ID: 49A5F855 Home Page: http://www.freedom.ind.br/otavio --------------------------------------------- "Microsoft gives you Windows ... Linux gives you the whole house." ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by: Power Architecture Resource Center: Free content, downloads, discussions, and more. http://solutions.newsforge.com/ibmarch.tmpl _______________________________________________ linux-usb-devel@lists.sourceforge.net To unsubscribe, use the last form field at: https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/linux-usb-devel
