Case withdrawn
--Irene
Irene Huang wrote:
> Discussion is still on-going about whether to keep this project or not.
>
> The project team will come back with update in due time.
>
> Thanks
>
> --Irene
> On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 11:21 +0800, Henry Zhang wrote:
>
>> Brian Cameron ??????:
>>
>>> Henry:
>>>
>>>
>>>>> How does it compare with the existing prtconf and cfgadm interfaces?
>>>>>
>>>> prtconf and cfgadm can be used to get more information besides USB
>>>> devices, lsusb is only focus on usb devices information. In fact, you
>>>> can get lots of same information by prtconf.
>>>>
>>> [...]
>>>
>>>> In fact, usbutils developement is not very active these days, and the
>>>> community keep a list in some webpage, and append the list until
>>>> someone give them the new information.
>>>> Since it keep changing, so difficult to packaging, and if remotely
>>>> queriy, I am afraid they can't provide the stable services, e.g.
>>>> server , bandwith, etc...
>>>>
>>> To me, this doesn't sound like a very compelling reason to integrate
>>> usbutils into Solaris. Especially when you consider section 2.2 which
>>> highlights that some features of usbutils are disabled on Solaris due
>>> to kernel differences.
>>>
>>> The current materials implies in section 3.3 and 3.4 that the main
>>> reason to integrate usbutils is because the user needs tools to get
>>> USB-related information, and that such tools don't exist on Solaris.
>>> In other words, what value does usbutils add for Solaris.
>>>
>>> Now that we know that other tools do exist on Solaris, we probably
>>> should rethink our justification for adding usbutils.
>>>
>> Thanks, Brian, seems there really is some block for usbutils
>> integration, I will consider and discuss internally these days...
>>
>
>
