Subject: Re: Device Properties: The Next Generation
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Chris G. Demetriou <email@example.com>
Date: 02/16/2001 09:21:21
Jason R Thorpe <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > i can see the "need" for two types, then: string & binary data.
> What byte order is the binary data in?
Is there any sane answer _other_ than 'native'?
(I suppose for large not-obvious-in-nature properties extracted from
firmware via md_getprop(), there might be a question... but it's not
clear to me what you could do that about that...)
Anyway, that kind of thing is what made me think that we should try to
stick to well-defined native types, with 'unknown' being used only as
a safety valve to allow compatible expansion.