Feature request - System Information USB shows device node used

[Andrei-Voicea]

Additional details should be added in System Information USB section (or a new one) such as the device node (/dev/ttyACMx for example) used by some devices, very useful for embedded programming where it is necessary to know the node used by the microcontroller in order to be flashed.

[fosslover306]

Already added, it's part of the new 'system informaton' update, and other usb info like speed, max and currant amp draw it's really nice actually not terminal required.

[fosslover306]

If the manufacture bothered to fill in that information, then it would be their if the data you want is not their then that is out of both our hands, and why do you insist on relieying on a setup naming scheme that won't help anyone, and is not supported and if you are skilled enoghe to program a micro controller you can figure it out.

To be vary clear if the data is not filled in, and the driver and device naming, labeling, catatgoryization, classation, and file path managment is up to the kernel and manufactures, to manage, control, and interact with for any given device nobody here can address your complaint or request in any real way.

However the Linux Foundation maybe could if they bother to read your email and can force all companies to fill out all the information on every usb device they currantly manufacture and ship, and all non compliant devices get broken and thrown away then maybe the device managment standard on Linux could change to make you happy, and make it viable to program with that assuption in mind

This is not even a industrial and embeded Linux distro it is an easy to use linux distro for newer and older computers and users, and that's if you can even get enough programers to make such a program to begin with and again assume every distro uses the same backends to allow it to work, now and in the future.

Programing is all about baseing your assumptions on the lowest common de-nominator like that random usb mouse with a missing product name you also need to asign a name to, that needs to work first and foremost.

Challenge: Use the system informaion tool and carefully check which details are filed in, now
Unplug it and plug in a different random usb device, refresh the device list to read what details it had filled once you have tried and checked all the information, now do this 10 more times and see if you can spot a pattern.

I bet you 50-70% of those random usb devices work out of the box, and yet are missing details.
Which incidently is why devices are managed like this to allow random usb devices to work correctly without needing 20,000 data entery clerks working around the clock to make stuff work.

[Andrei-Voicea]

We move away from the proposed topic, I understand that I did not express myself properly in the post and I will edit to add more details. I understand why it seems like a useless feature to a lot of people is really a fix for a group of people. I strongly believe that linux mint is for all people a general and intuitive distro and even this intuitiveness I would like to see by adding small details like these I talked about.

[cplittlfield]

where? I should see something like ttySX or ttyACM.

What is the source that told you that? And I'd be curious to know why a microcontroller would show up as a character device in the first place. On the other hand, my Wacom tablet shows up as a character device, and that makes no sense to me, either. So perhaps I'm being hasty.

In any case, trying to manipulate my tablet by opening /dev/bus/usb/001/002 does nothing useful; better to use xsetwacom for the purpose. Perhaps there is a similar utility for flashing your microcontroller? Or is that what you are trying to write?

If so, then perhaps the source that tells you what device name to expect will also tell you how to access the device. You might also want to consult the driver source code, which would be available at kernel.org, plus any relevant documentation from the manufacturer.

When you get right down to it, expecting UNIX/Linux to introduce COM and AUX ports would be be like expecting Windows to start using regular slashes instead of backslashes. Too late—current practice is already baked in and not going to change.

[Andrei-Voicea]

where? I should see something like ttySX or ttyACM.

What is the source that told you that? And I'd be curious to know why a microcontroller would show up as a character device in the first place. On the other hand, my Wacom tablet shows up as a character device, and that makes no sense to me, either. So perhaps I'm being hasty.

A microcontroller shows up as /dev/ttyACMx because it is acting like a simple serial port over USB, and Linux represents serial ports as character devices; the kernel uses a built-in driver for that, and then exposes it as a stream of bytes you can read and write like a file, which makes it compatible with existing serial programs and tools without needing special drivers.

In any case, trying to manipulate my tablet by opening /dev/bus/usb/001/002 does nothing useful; better to use xsetwacom for the purpose. Perhaps there is a similar utility for flashing your microcontroller? Or is that what you are trying to write?

If so, then perhaps the source that tells you what device name to expect will also tell you how to access the device. You might also want to consult the driver source code, which would be available at kernel.org, plus any relevant documentation from the manufacturer.

When you get right down to it, expecting UNIX/Linux to introduce COM and AUX ports would be be like expecting Windows to start using regular slashes instead of backslashes. Too late—current practice is already baked in and not going to change.

I didn't specify anywhere that I want the concept of COM to be introduced in windows, probably the picture confuses a lot and the fact that I used to refer to a device node as a port (a bad habit left over from windows). I will edit the topic.

[cplittlfield]

Ah. Thanks for clarifying.

[billyswong]

The issue here is, I don't think there is any standard for something like /dev/bus/usb/00x/00y to be the "same" of /dev/ttyACMz and get such information exposed.

[Andrei-Voicea]

I wouldn't be surprised, the truth is that I haven't studied how system information works, I really hoped to make my job easier and find the information directly without plugging and unplugging the device to find out the information.

[cplittlfield]

A further question, if you don't mind: You have checked out the available utilities, such as lsusb, lshw, and the like, right? Though, to be honest, I'm not sure any of them will give you the information you want, either.

In any case, good luck! There definitely has to be a better way to query the device than by unplugging it and plugging it back in.

[Andrei-Voicea]

It works with lsusb too, but I still need to plug and unplug.

[fosslover306]

For future referance , The usb device name is usually a good clue, for instance a lot of wifi dongle are named 'wireless adaptor' or some varation, basicly just treat it like a fun logic game rule out what it isn't, and then infer which one it is.

I had to do this on windows too because a provided name might not be helpful or acurite, and while unlikely shady usb devices snuck into a server room or office have been used in the past to break into whole networks and export data for months or years before anyone noticed the unautherized device.

Also the device behavior for unix was standardized and established before USB was even a thing, let alone common and it still worked and avoided com-port conflcs so there was no reason to change it.

Similerly Microslop chose to use the com-port concept instead before usb was even a thing so they were also stuck with it and hid the com conflicks problems by having certain software and hardware use different default com-ports.

LGR used to do a lot of old PC custimization with dos and windows 95/98 and some of the "oddware" he would try would cause problems because they did not qet the memo and used random com-ports which caused him a lot headaches, but by 95-98 most software mostly fell in line and stuck to what they were 'suposed' to use.

Linux started as a opensource fork of Unix, which was designed to handle 100's of users and 'small' harddisks, large tape drives, and what ever the mainframe owners thru at it. Hence why device management was setup like it was to avoid device conflics.