Return-Path: <cyrus@holtmann.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikfGdrt2gL0gVnjA6gPYw1i+PXpbyWw0kFEf6gz@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTim7WPm4nyKVwU36ASMDTF_5N=eB8AnfutcODMv9@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikfGdrt2gL0gVnjA6gPYw1i+PXpbyWw0kFEf6gz@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Sep 2010 21:13:33 -0300
Message-ID: <AANLkTim9LjKjVgw-aSbjTrH0wZsvzHV=W3p4gadau4t3@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Why is l2cap_connect re-implemented in gattool instead of using
 btio wrappers?
From: Vinicius Gomes <vinicius.gomes@openbossa.org>
To: Arun Kumar <arunkat@gmail.com>
Cc: linux-bluetooth@vger.kernel.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Sender: linux-bluetooth-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-ID: <linux-bluetooth.vger.kernel.org>

Hi Arun,

On Tue, Sep 7, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Arun Kumar <arunkat@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>  Just trying to understand the need for a separate l2cap_connect
>  re-implemention in gatttool.c instead of using bt_io_connect( ) wrapper
>  from
>  btio.c? Since current GATT implementation tries to work on existing BR/EDR,
>  cant btio wrapper suffice for this initial step...
>

An initial version of gatttool used to have support for ATT/GATT over
Unix sockets, we did not use btio because it allowed us to reuse most
of the connection code.

Now that the Unix socket support was removed, there's no real reason
not use the btio functions.

> Best regards,
> Arun
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-bluetooth" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>


Cheers,
-- 
Vinicius