On Wed, Apr 25, 2018 at 12:57 PM, Linus Torvalds
<torva...@linux-foundation.org> wrote:
>
> Odd. It was _supposed_ to apply to current master.
Ok, apparently you worked it out.
Anyway, the commit message could be something simple along the lines of
Do a better job of picking which transport to use
If the user specified bluetooth, we really should pick bluetooth, not
probe and possibly fall back to something else.
We should also honor the users choice of BLE vs classic BT.
Signed-off-by: Linus Torvalds <torva...@linux-foundation.org>
or similar. But it _would_ be good to test that this actually makes
Petrel 2 work with rfcomm. Because it's certainly possible that there
is something else wrong with rfcomm.
Maybe we have screwed up the rfcomm channel number logic or something?
Because we have a very special case with that whole "channel number
5". That's all old code and I had nothing to do with it (because I've
never had anything that worked with this anyway).
Linus
_______________________________________________
subsurface mailing list
subsurface@subsurface-divelog.org
http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
