[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: What is "discover -t" saying?



On 2018-06-24 at 09:36, The Wanderer wrote:

> On 2018-06-24 at 09:27, Richard Owlett wrote:
> 
>> On 06/24/2018 08:16 AM, The Wanderer wrote:

>>> If you look at the "Examples" section of the man page, you'll see that
>>> the first example given includes four lines which consist *only* of
>>> "unknown unknown".
>>> 
>>>  From that, and from the information provided on the other lines from the
>>> output examples, I infer that the output format is "vendor model".
>>> (Those terms are listed under the third example, "Get model and vendor
>>> information by type".)
>>> 
>>> In other words: this line represents a device of an unknown model, from
>>> an unknown vendor.
>>> 
>>> (All of that is my inference and interpretation, not based on anything
>>> more solid. Even assuming I've got it right, I agree that the man page
>>> could be clearer about this.)
>> 
>> Except [ <grin> &/or <groan> ], lsusb reports:
>>> Bus 004 Device 062: ID 067b:25a1 Prolific Technology, Inc. PL25A1 Host-Host Bridge
>> The "067b" is Vendor ID.
>> The "25a1" identifies a particular device of that manufacturer.
> 
> Yes; that's for the Prolific Technology device.
> 
> As indicated by the fact that the man-page examples put "unknown
> unknown" on a separate line, I think that "unknown unknown" represents a
> completely separate device; I don't think it's related to the Prolific
> Technology device at all. I think the fact that they appeared on one
> line in your mail is an artifact of a line-wrapping mistake somewhere in
> the process.

Try:

discover --vendor-id --model-id -t | grep unknown

That should give you the comparable IDs for your unknown device.

-- 
   The Wanderer

The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one
persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all
progress depends on the unreasonable man.         -- George Bernard Shaw

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


Reply to: