2012/7/3 Tobias Powalowski <tobias.powalow...@googlemail.com>: > Am 03.07.2012 08:49, schrieb Ludovic Rousseau: >> Why is the lib called libusb.a and not libusb-1.0.a? >> >> My hypothesis is that libusb.a comes from libusb-compat and is not >> (statically) linked with libusb (or libusbx). So of course all the >> libusb-1.0 symbols are missing. >> Can you check that? > Correct, does that mean i need to rebuild libusb-compat against libusbx?
Your dynamic libusb-compat lib (libusb.so) should be linked with libusb-1.0. Check with ldd(1). Is that the case? And the libusb.so lib should not have any missing symbol. Check with "ldd -r" Is that also the case? >> Another good idea is to NOT distribute a static lib. Only the dynamic >> .so should be provided. But that is not the problem. > I already disabled static lib in libusbx. So you can't build a libusb-compat static lib without a libusb(x) 1.0 static version. Disable static lib for libusb-compat as well. Bye -- Dr. Ludovic Rousseau ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Live Security Virtual Conference Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
