Re: [PATCH 0/5] udev rules update

[Philippe Nunes <philippe.nunes@linux.intel.com>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1813 bytes --]

Hi Marcel,

On 11/29/2011 01:20 PM, Marcel Holtmann wrote:
> Hi Philippe,
>
>> This set of patches have been sent this summer but not upstreamed.
>> As few bugs have been opened which could be fixed by those patches, I resend them
>> for review.
>>
>> - For Speedup dongles, the logic in udevng is to assign the modem port on the
>> latest interface. This is not true for SpeedUp SU-7300U (BUG #23168) and
>> SpeedUp 9800 (BUG #23167). So, I added 2 specific rules for both dongles.
>>
>> - For dongle ZTE MF190, 6 interfaces are present and we shall use the interface
>> ttyUSB4 for modem channel. The logic in udevng is to assign the modem channel
>> on the latest interface. To not break the support of ZTE modems with 5
>> interfaces (which are using the 4th one for PPP, like K3570), I can't extend
>> the current logic to take into account the ttyUSB4. So, I added a specific rule
>> for ZTE MF190.
>> I added also a specific rule for the dongle ZTE MF668 as the modem channel is
>> not on the latest interface (BUG #23683)
>
> why is all this reasoning here and not in the commit message of the
> patches? I expect that every patch has a proper commit message that
> explains its goal. Just a non-meaningful subject line is not enough.

Yes, you're right, I should move this explanation in the commit 
messages. Before, sending a new set of patches accordingly, I would like 
to raise an issue regarding the patches for ofono.rules:

Your commit "build: do not install ofono.rules anymore" regarding 
Makefile.am makes none effective my proposed changes in ofono rules.
Could you explain why the file ofono.rules is not installed anymore 
whereas we are still supposed to consider some specific properties 
exposed by this file?

Thanks,

Regards,

Philippe.