Le 13 janvier 2011 23:35, Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE a écrit :
> Per discussion on the mailing list, my proposed sections would be :
>
> * Supported and certified by the author (commercial service, to become
> certified, please send an email to learn about the price and procedure).
> * Supported an
Hello Viktor,
please have a look at PKCS#15 "6.8.2 Pin objects" for the definition of
local and global PIN objects. There is no mention of storage location.
So, why trying to fix something that's not broken? BTW it segfaults.
Regards
Andre
___
opensc-
Dear members,
I have been reviewing libccid pages.
Here are copies to keep a trace:
<-- Begin of copy
* http://pcsclite.alioth.debian.org/ccid/supported.html
If you are a reader manufacturer and your reader is not listed here then
contact me at ...
* http://pcsclite.alioth.debian.org/ccid/shou
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 17:58 +0100, Viktor TARASOV wrote:
> On 13.01.2011 17:07, Andre Zepezauer wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > OpenSC as a library doesn't need it's own logging system. Such things
> > are better placed at application level. If debugging is necessary, then
> > 'export OPENSC_DEBUG=9' + p
Le jeudi 13 janvier 2011 à 18:52 +0100, Andre Zepezauer a écrit :
> It would be easier to call it 'certified'. And of cause, certification
> may be a service that is not for free.
I second that. Certification is loud and clear.
--
Jean-Michel Pouré - Gooze - http://www.gooze.eu
On 13.01.2011 18:23, Aventra wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> From: opensc-devel-boun...@lists.opensc-project.org
>> [mailto:opensc-devel-boun...@lists.opensc-project.org] On Behalf Of Viktor
>> TARASOV
>> Do you use the myeid.profile that is actually in the trunk?
>> Normally you don't need SoPIN if you use it
Le jeudi 13 janvier 2011 à 18:47 +0100, Ludovic Rousseau a écrit :
> But I can't support a reader I do not have. So they are listed (by
> default) in the "Should work but untested by me" list.
You have the R-301 v2. I shipped it to you and I have an email telling
us that you received it. It is li
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 18:39 +0100, Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE wrote:
> Le jeudi 13 janvier 2011 à 18:08 +0100, Peter Stuge a écrit :
> > > * Unsupported.
> > > * Supported (and not should work).
> > > * Supported and reviewed (and not Supported).
> >
> > The good names depend on what "support" mean
Le 13 janvier 2011 18:39, Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE a écrit :
> Le jeudi 13 janvier 2011 à 18:08 +0100, Peter Stuge a écrit :
>> > * Unsupported.
>> > * Supported (and not should work).
>> > * Supported and reviewed (and not Supported).
>>
>> The good names depend on what "support" means in this c
Le jeudi 13 janvier 2011 à 18:08 +0100, Peter Stuge a écrit :
> > * Unsupported.
> > * Supported (and not should work).
> > * Supported and reviewed (and not Supported).
>
> The good names depend on what "support" means in this context. I
> don't know that. Do you? Maybe Ludovic can help clarify?
On Jan 13, 2011, at 7:08 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE wrote:
>>> I've been under the impression (based on the header in "should work"
>>> list [1]) that it contains readers which work as expected and which
>>> Ludovic has.
>>
>> The names should be then:
>> * Unsupported.
>
Hello,
On Jan 13, 2011, at 7:08 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE wrote:
>>> I've been under the impression (based on the header in "should work"
>>> list [1]) that it contains readers which work as expected and which
>>> Ludovic has.
>>
>> The names should be then:
>> * Unsuppor
Hi,
> From: opensc-devel-boun...@lists.opensc-project.org [mailto:opensc-devel-
>
> On 13.01.2011 16:43, Aventra wrote:
> >> From: opensc-devel-boun...@lists.opensc-project.org
[mailto:opensc-devel-
> boun...@lists.opensc-project.org] On Behalf Of Viktor TARASOV
> >>
> >> On 11.01.2011 13:32, Ave
Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE wrote:
> > I've been under the impression (based on the header in "should work"
> > list [1]) that it contains readers which work as expected and which
> > Ludovic has.
>
> The names should be then:
> * Unsupported.
> * Supported (and not should work).
> * Supported and r
On 13.01.2011 17:07, Andre Zepezauer wrote:
> Hello,
>
> OpenSC as a library doesn't need it's own logging system. Such things
> are better placed at application level. If debugging is necessary, then
> 'export OPENSC_DEBUG=9' + pkcs11-spy works for me.
>
> What would be the advantage of having log
On 13.01.2011 16:43, Aventra wrote:
> Hi,
>> From: opensc-devel-boun...@lists.opensc-project.org
>> [mailto:opensc-devel-boun...@lists.opensc-project.org] On Behalf Of Viktor
>> TARASOV
>> Hello,
>>
>> On 11.01.2011 13:32, Aventra development wrote:
>>> What do you think about the possibility tha
Hello,
OpenSC as a library doesn't need it's own logging system. Such things
are better placed at application level. If debugging is necessary, then
'export OPENSC_DEBUG=9' + pkcs11-spy works for me.
What would be the advantage of having logs of different instances of
OpenSC intermixed in a singl
Hi,
>From: opensc-devel-boun...@lists.opensc-project.org
[mailto:opensc-devel-boun...@lists.opensc-project.org] On Behalf Of Viktor
TARASOV
>
>Hello,
>
>On 11.01.2011 13:32, Aventra development wrote:
>>What do you think about the possibility that when a card is initialized
using pkcs15-init that
Hi,
what do you think about possibility to configure content of the log message.
I mean something like this in 'opensc.conf':
app default {
log_level = debug;
log debug {
debug = 8;
debug_file = /tmp/opensc-debug.log;
print_p
Hello,
On Thu, 2011-01-13 at 11:37 +0100, Ludovic Rousseau wrote:
> Found the bug (I think).
>
> The CCID driver calculate a timeout accordings to the card ATR. In
> your case the timeout is 1428 ms rounded to 2 seconds.
> Log says:
> 0007 ifdhandler.c:791:IFDHSetProtocolParameters() Timeout:
Dear all,
> I've been under the impression (based on the header in "should work"
> list [1]) that it contains readers which work as expected and which
> Ludovic has.
The names should be then:
* Unsupported.
* Supported (and not should work).
* Supported and reviewed (and not Supported).
> So ple
Hello,
On Jan 12, 2011, at 2:04 PM, Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE wrote:
> Le mercredi 12 janvier 2011 à 13:26 +0200, Martin Paljak a écrit :
>>
>>> Per discussion, we have to pay to get the reader out of the
>> unsupported
>>> list, and this is quite a large sum of money.
>> Pay whom? How much?
P
Le jeudi 13 janvier 2011 à 11:37 +0100, Ludovic Rousseau a écrit :
> The CCID driver calculate a timeout accordings to the card ATR. In
> your case the timeout is 1428 ms rounded to 2 seconds.
Are all CCID readers impacted?
Kind regards,
--
Jean-Michel Pouré - Gooze - http://w
2011/1/13 Aventra :
> Hi,
>
> Sorry, a typo when doing logging...
> Attached is a new log.
Found the bug (I think).
The CCID driver calculate a timeout accordings to the card ATR. In
your case the timeout is 1428 ms rounded to 2 seconds.
Log says:
0007 ifdhandler.c:791:IFDHSetProtocolParamete
Hi,
Sorry, a typo when doing logging...
Attached is a new log.
Kind regards,
Toni
> -Original Message-
> From: Ludovic Rousseau [mailto:ludovic.rouss...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 12. tammikuuta 2011 19:29
> To: Aventra
> Cc: opensc-devel
> Subject: Re: [opensc-devel] Misleading information abou
Hello,
> -Original Message-
>
> On 12.01.2011 18:41, Aventra wrote:
> > My questions are:
> > - have other OpenSC users tried cards that use T=1 protocol?
> > - have somebody managed to use MyEID cards without adjusting the
> > configuration?
>
> In OpenSC-trunk r5087 MyEID card is n
26 matches
Mail list logo
