On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 07:02:00PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > > > No, he meant 0x9010. The values are binary-coded decimal. But 0x900a
> > > > won't hurt, since it's only used in a range comparison.
> > > >
> > > > Alan Stern
> > >
> > > Well, we all know what happens when you assu
> > > No, he meant 0x9010. The values are binary-coded decimal. But 0x900a
> > > won't hurt, since it's only used in a range comparison.
> > >
> > > Alan Stern
> >
> > Well, we all know what happens when you assume... :)
> >
> > I saw letters in other entries, but now I see I didn't see lett
On Tue, Feb 03, 2004 at 12:56:19PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > > How about 2 entries. One for devices 0x1000 to 0x9009 and one for
> > > > 0x9010 to 0x ? Care to make up a patch for this?
> > > >
> > > > thanks,
> > > >
>
> On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >
> > > How about 2 entries. One for devices 0x1000 to 0x9009 and one for
> > > 0x9010 to 0x ? Care to make up a patch for this?
> > >
> > > thanks,
> > >
> > > greg k-h
> > >
> >
> > Certainly. I assumed you meant 0x900a-0x for the
On Mon, 2 Feb 2004 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > How about 2 entries. One for devices 0x1000 to 0x9009 and one for
> > 0x9010 to 0x ? Care to make up a patch for this?
> >
> > thanks,
> >
> > greg k-h
> >
>
> Certainly. I assumed you meant 0x900a-0x for the newer cameras.
No, he
> How about 2 entries. One for devices 0x1000 to 0x9009 and one for
> 0x9010 to 0x ? Care to make up a patch for this?
>
> thanks,
>
> greg k-h
>
Certainly. I assumed you meant 0x900a-0x for the newer cameras.
--
Dan Scholnik
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--- linux-2.6.2-rc1/drivers/usb/sto
On Mon, Feb 02, 2004 at 12:52:52AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> I'll apologize in advance for posting this to both users and devel, but it
> didn't get much attention on the users list.
>
> I have a Casio 2000ux camera that worked fine under linux through 2.4.22:
>
> Jan 28 00:44:54 local
I'll apologize in advance for posting this to both users and devel, but it
didn't get much attention on the users list.
I have a Casio 2000ux camera that worked fine under linux through 2.4.22:
Jan 28 00:44:54 localhost kernel: Vendor: Casio Model: QV DigitalCamera Rev:
9009
Jan 28 00:44
