Question about file transfer to Android device

[Colin Law]

On Tue, 23 Sept 2025 at 14:55, Bret Busby <bret at busby.net> wrote:
>
> On 23/9/25 21:21, Colin Law wrote:
> > On Tue, 23 Sept 2025 at 14:08, Bret Busby <bret at busby.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> What I am complaining about, is that the file management is going to the
> >> hardware level, when I believe that it should be operating at the
> >> operating system level.
> >
> > What makes you say that?  It isn't the file management that is
> > failing, it is libmtp recognising the device that is the problem. It
> > is the same problem that arises if a new chip is designed for wifi,
> > which needs modified wifi drivers.  The new wifi chip will not work
> > with an old version of the OS.  Note that the error in the log you
> > posted occurred when the device was plugged in, it is nothing to do
> > with file management.
> >
> >>
> >> If we use filezilla, or wget, they do not care what CPU or what brand
> >> and model of HDD's or whether the HDD's are mechanical or electronic, at
> >> the other end - they do their file operations, as far as I am aware, at
> >> the operating system level, and they do not care whether the network
> >> administrator at the other end, is wearing pantyhose or woollen socks,
> >> or leather soled footwear or rubber soled footwear.
> >
> > But the OS must understand the hardware of the HDD, or the wifi interface.
> >
>
> The operating system at the other end, should interface with its
> hardware, not the operating system that is the remote operating system.
>
> Does wget or filezilla contain all of the hardware drivers for all
> possible hardware components of all possible computers?
>
> The wifi interface is irrelevant.
>
> The connection was attempted via USB tethering - hardwired.
>
> An operating system should be concerned with hardware drivers only for
> the hardware with which it directly interfaces.
>
> When the operating system connects via communication protocols, it
> should not need to be concerned with hardware drivers for hardware on a
> remote device with which the initiating device is communicating, through
> its operating system, to the operating system on the remote device.
>
> The communication between the two devices, should be solely at the
> operating system level, unless the initiating device is attempting to
> perform a direct hardware operation on the remote device, like changing
> the processing speed of the CPU on the remote device, or, checking the
> HDD on the remote device, for bad blocks.
>
> File transfer operations between devices that have independent operating
> systems, should be dependent on only the interface between the operating
> systems, not, on the hardware of the remote device.
>
> If you check in at an airport, to board a flight, it should not matter,
> and, the carrier airline should have no need to know, what size, brand,
> or model, of tyres are on the vehicle that conveyed you to the airport,
> or, whether the driver of the vehicle that conveyed you to the airport,
> has false teeth or permed hair. What should matter, is that, at the
> airport, you follow the correct protocols for checking in, to board the
> flight.
>
> The need for hardware drivers for remote devices, simply for file
> transfer operations, when both devices  have independent, standalone
> operating systems, is simply an obstruction to the file transfer
> process. The file transfer process should be solely at the operating
> system level, and, not at the hardware level.
>
> PC-DOS had a switch for its formatting command, that enabled a character
> to be written to every byte position on a HDD. For something like that,
> okay, the driver for the HDD, is needed. For remote file transfer
> operations, between independent, standalone computers, with independent,
> standalone operating systems, hardware drivers, and, machine level
> communications, should be not needed, between the devices - it should be
> done solely by communication between the operating systems of the
> devices, and, the operating system of each device, should alone, deal
> with the hardware communications for the device, unless, as stated
> above, the remote operation is a direct hardware operation, and, not
> simply a data transfer operation.

So is it the mtp protocol that you are complaining about?

Colin L.