Folks -

I wonder if I could now be taken off the distribution list for this
thread?  It's gone more technical than I feel the need to be involved
with at this stage.  I'm very happy to test any more patches, however -
please let me know if there's anything you'd like looked at.

Thanks again for the help,

Yours,

-Mike.

On Fri, 2003-04-25 at 05:34, Matthew Dharm wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 24, 2003 at 07:12:38PM -0700, Matthew Dharm wrote:
> > On Fri, Apr 25, 2003 at 02:43:25AM +0200, Andries.Brouwer@cwi.nl wrote:
> > > Are there any objections against viewing sr_bufflen
> > > as the amount of actually available buffer space
> > > (and thus potentially different from the transferred amount)?
> > 
> > YES!  I MOST DEFINITELY OBJECT!
> 
> Before anyone reads this the wrong way, I want to apologize for the
> shouting.  It was brought on by a combination of high stress at work and
> the feeling that I was going around for another turn on the merry-go-round.
> 
> That's not an excuse just an explanation.
> 
> But the point remains, changing the meaning of sr_bufflen will break
> usb-storage.
> 
> Matt
-- 
07050 144575 mike@hingston.demon.co.uk