>> On Tue 10 June 2003 23:12, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Daniele,
>>
>> Hi Randy, nice to see you (even if nice to hear you would be more
>> appropriate ;) )
>>
>>> Were you able to test this new code path? If so, how?
>>
>> Well, that's a good question ...
>> because i don't know if there is
On Thu, 12 Jun 2003 10:35:33 +0200 Andries Brouwer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 12:10:27AM -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
|
| > I'm trying to use 'tunelp' to test it. The latest version that I can
| > find source code for is 1.3, but
|
| tunelp is part of util-linux
| tunelp
On Thu, Jun 12, 2003 at 12:10:27AM -0700, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> I'm trying to use 'tunelp' to test it. The latest version that I can
> find source code for is 1.3, but
tunelp is part of util-linux
tunelp-1.3 is ancient
Andries
---
This SF.N
On Thu 12 June 2003 09:10, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
> > Because you are at it i wish to say that, in my opinion, adding an entry
> > to sysctl tables would be more appropriate than playing with ioctl. For
> > example, a user/sysadm could set automaticaly LP_ABORTOPEN in any init
> > script to avoid to c
> On Tue 10 June 2003 23:12, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
>>
>> Hi Daniele,
>
> Hi Randy, nice to see you (even if nice to hear you would be more
> appropriate ;) )
>
>> Were you able to test this new code path? If so, how?
>
> Well, that's a good question ...
> because i don't know if there is any distro
On Tue 10 June 2003 23:12, Randy.Dunlap wrote:
>
> Hi Daniele,
Hi Randy, nice to see you (even if nice to hear you would be more appropriate ;) )
> Were you able to test this new code path? If so, how?
Well, that's a good question ...
because i don't know if there is any distro program that pla
On Sat, 7 Jun 2003 15:44:04 +0200 Daniele Bellucci <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| Hi,
| this patch add LP_ABORTOPEN ioctl in usb lp device driver.
|
| As you can see a member flags is nedeed in struct usblp, i think we could
| move usblp->used in usblp->flags.
| For example, in usblp_open rather th
