--1hVIwB4NpNcOOTEe
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 12:56:23PM -0800, Jason Thorpe wrote:
>=20
> On Mar 7, 2007, at 12:51 PM, Daniel Carosone wrote:
>=20
> >On Wed, Mar 07, 2007 at 12:46:42PM -0800, Jason Thorpe wrote:
> >>Should be the other way around!  ubt should avoid matching non-
> >>UDPROTO_BLUETOOTH devices!
> >
> >No, that's not the problem - ubt doesn't get a chance because aue
> >grabs the device first (and presumably would also for a real aue with
> >the same product id's).
>=20
> Autoconfig, in the direct configuration case (like what USB does) =20
> gives everyone a chance and then takes the highest-priority match (and =
=20
> if all return the same priority, takes the first one, I think).

Yes, yes, "first" meaning "at the highest priority", based on the
device-id match rather than the class match.  Changing ubt's behaviour
isn't going to help, unless it can be made to match this device at an
even higher priority again (which isn't quite what you said either,
but would be a better fix).

--
Dan.

--1hVIwB4NpNcOOTEe
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFF7yg0EAVxvV4N66cRAhFbAKDzpQIQTPqYcVLh5T/jdfxneHItPwCg2Q3i
qF+y5R1ivYBkrcHdJFshN8I=
=qGQy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--1hVIwB4NpNcOOTEe--