Re: RFC: [2.6 patch] let BLK_DEV_UB depend on EMBEDDED

[Ed Tomlinson <edt@aei.ca>]

On Monday 20 December 2004 01:37, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Sun, 19 Dec 2004 22:20:55 -0800, Matthew Dharm <mdharm-kernel@one-eyed-alien.net> wrote:
> 
> > I can tell you that this has turned into the single largest source of bug
> > reports/complaints about usb-storage.  Something has to be done.  I just
> > don't know what.
> 
> Is it that bad, really? Honestly, I could not imagine users can be so dumb.
> The option defaults to off. There is a warning in the Kconfig. And yet they
> first enable it and then complain about it. I don't know what to do about
> it, either.

Its not that they just enable it.  Its that it has side effects.  I enable it to support
one device - it then 'devnaps' other devices that usbstorage supports _much_
better.  Is there some way it could work in reverse.  eg. let ub bind only if 
usbstorage does not, possibly making usbstorage a _little_ more conservative
if ub is present?

Ed Tomlinson