firewire bug, or just drop it [was Re: Help making sense of ]

From: George Hartzell <hartzell_at_kestrel.alerce.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2004 15:25:25 -0700
Doug White writes:
 > On Sun, 22 Aug 2004, George Hartzell wrote:
 > > [...]
 > > I figured out how to ask fwcontrol to tell me more about the device
 > > inside the enclosure, and discovered that it's a Prolific PL-3507.  A
 > > little googling about suggests that it's a well known PITA device, e.g.
 > >
 > >   http://forum.rpc1.org/viewtopic.php?t=25140&postdays=0&postorder=asc&&start=0&sid=0a359d410cfd87df72f2543365922421
 > >
 > > So, I'm left to decide whether to muck with the firmware or just chuck
 > > it.....
 > 
 > I'd give up now. :)
 > [...]

[background: I've been unsuccessfully messing about with a firewire
enclosure and 5.2.1 release (and 6.0), it turns out it uses a chip
that's known to be problematic]

Are the folks that support the firewire stuff interested in supporting
spastic hardware like this?

I could file a pr for it, but I'm not sure it's a bug.  I haven't
encountered quite this situation before and don't know what the Right
Thing To Do is.

I could make the hardware available if it'd help tighten up the
subsystem. 

g.
Received on Mon Aug 23 2004 - 20:24:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:08 UTC