In my case (Jaunty AMD64, Sanyo Katana II) I'm getting the same dmesg output as A7Bo, but the symptoms are different as seen from bitpim. There, /dev/ttyACM0 is accessible, as is one of the two ports needed to access the phone. At the moment usb::002::014::2 is accessible but usb::002::014::1 is not.
This is after I modified the file /lib/udev/rules.d/40-bitpim.rules, adding the text
GROUP="plugdev",
to each line. Before that the device (e.g., /dev/bus/usb/002/014) showed up with group "root" and both its ports were inaccessible from bitpim run as a normal user. Now the device is created with group "plugdev".
Interestingly, the program /lib/udev/bpudev which the rules file points to appears not to be getting executed. Therefore any changes to it, or to /etc/default/bitpim (which it invokes to set the default user and group for the devices) are not applied.
I tried running bitpim using gksudo, and even then only one of these two ports was accessible. So it seems it's not a permissions problem any more.
In my case (Jaunty AMD64, Sanyo Katana II) I'm getting the same dmesg output as A7Bo, but the symptoms are different as seen from bitpim. There, /dev/ttyACM0 is accessible, as is one of the two ports needed to access the phone. At the moment usb::002::014::2 is accessible but usb::002::014::1 is not.
This is after I modified the file /lib/udev/ rules.d/ 40-bitpim. rules, adding the text
GROUP="plugdev",
to each line. Before that the device (e.g., /dev/bus/ usb/002/ 014) showed up with group "root" and both its ports were inaccessible from bitpim run as a normal user. Now the device is created with group "plugdev".
Interestingly, the program /lib/udev/bpudev which the rules file points to appears not to be getting executed. Therefore any changes to it, or to /etc/default/bitpim (which it invokes to set the default user and group for the devices) are not applied.
I tried running bitpim using gksudo, and even then only one of these two ports was accessible. So it seems it's not a permissions problem any more.