On Tue, Oct 30, 2012 at 3:30 AM, Peter Stuge <pe...@stuge.se> wrote: > That is confusing. HIDAPI doesn't depend on libusb. > > HIDAPI can optionally use libusb, but that's only useful on old > Linux systems where the OS-native HID API was insufficient.
That is true for Linux. HIDAPI also uses native HID API under Windows and Mac OS X. https://github.com/signal11/hidapi Take note HIDAPI depends on libusb (FreeBSD's own BSD licensed libusb-1.0 API implementation, on top of its own libusb20 library) under FreeBSD. I can see that HIDAPI will be used more an more often for generic HID device. On the other hand, there are existing libusb based application which use libusb-0.1 and 1.0 API under Linux and libusbx's Windows HID backend give them a nature migration path without changing to use HIDAPI. Moreover, I can see that there will be more features added to libusbx in the future which HIDAPI may take time to implement (eg: hotplug, cross-platform event handling). So in the end, for generic USB HID device, HIDAPI and libusbx will both be a viable option. It is always good to provide users the choices. So as Pete says, libusbx's Windows HID backend will be here to stay as it is beneficial to some users. -- Xiaofan ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Everyone hates slow websites. So do we. Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics Download AppDynamics Lite for free today: http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_sfd2d_oct _______________________________________________ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
