Re: [Libusbx-devel] bulk transfer error centos 6.5 (32-bit) on VirtualBox running on Windows 7 (64-bit)
On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: Did you check the API documentation? The last parameter to usb_control_msg is the timeout in milliseconds. TNX for the hint. I've tried to increase the timeout, It did not help. To a certain extent, however, I am just blowing smoke. Control messages usually complete very quickly. Your symptoms seem to indicate some more fundamental problem, and I don't know what to suggest. Since I am not a programmer, I really do not know how to proceed from here. In any case, thanks for the help. One of the advantages of libusb is that it crosses platforms. Why don't you run your code on Windows? Yes I could,,, but I wrote already few other utilities on LINUX (mostly GPIB related). I would like to continue on Linux. On top of that, licensing is free, no virues, upgrading linux require just a recompile of my utilities, stability, reliability, abundance of programming/scripting tools so, the users can use my utilities within any programming environment they are comfortable with. Like octave, shells,c, C++, Ruby, Perl, Pascal adn as a command line. Working remotely is a plus... etc ..Stuff I wrote in 2002/03 in my former company is still in use today, 12 years later. It was written for RedHat 8 2012 and just recompiled on CentOS 6. -- You can't run an economy where the financial sector is making 40 percent of the profits. former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker 2009 -- Open source business process management suite built on Java and Eclipse Turn processes into business applications with Bonita BPM Community Edition Quickly connect people, data, and systems into organized workflows Winner of BOSSIE, CODIE, OW2 and Gartner awards http://p.sf.net/sfu/Bonitasoft ___ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
Re: [Libusbx-devel] bulk transfer error centos 6.5 (32-bit) on VirtualBox running on Windows 7 (64-bit)
Igor Furlan wrote: On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: One of the advantages of libusb is that it crosses platforms. Why don't you run your code on Windows? Yes I could,,, but I wrote already few other utilities on LINUX (mostly GPIB related). I would like to continue on Linux. On top of that, licensing is free, no virues, upgrading linux require just a recompile of my utilities, stability, reliability, abundance of programming/scripting tools so, the users can use my utilities within any programming environment they are comfortable with. Like octave, shells,c, C++, Ruby, Perl, Pascal adn as a command line. OK, but you are intentionally overlooking the very important point that YOUR USERS ARE ALREADY RUNNING WINDOWS. You said this yourself. They already have licenses. They already have virus checkers. They already know how to launch programs and interact. They do not know Octave, bash, Ruby, Perl, or Pascal. You are asking them to run an additional rather intrusive tool (VirtualBox) so they can run an entirely unfamiliar environment just so you can feel religiously pure in your development. Your upgrade argument is also silly. An upgrade of Windows doesn't require ANY recompiling of your tools and utilities. The old binaries just keep on working. Microsoft has spent a vast fortune to ensure that the Fortune 100 companies don't have to do any work on their line-of-business tools to slip in an operating system upgrade. Linux developers, on the other hand, tend to favor purity over compatibility. Working remotely is a plus... etc ..Stuff I wrote in 2002/03 in my former company is still in use today, 12 years later. It was written for RedHat 8 2012 and just recompiled on CentOS 6. You're just making stuff up that doesn't have any basis in fact. The Windows remote access tools are just as good or better than the remote access tools on Linux. I'm still running Windows tools that I wrote and last compiled in 1995. Now that I'm running a 64-bit Windows, my 25-year-old 16-bit tools no longer run, but I've known that was coming for 10 years. It's interesting that you tried to use backwards compatibility as an argument. As a driver writer, I know that Windows has the best backwards compatibility behavior of ANY of the major operating systems. The video capture driver BINARIES that I wrote for Windows 98SE way back in the 20th Century still run in Windows 8. With a Linux kernel driver, you often don't even get SOURCE compatibility between version x.y.z and x.y.z+1. -- Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com Providenza Boekelheide, Inc. -- Open source business process management suite built on Java and Eclipse Turn processes into business applications with Bonita BPM Community Edition Quickly connect people, data, and systems into organized workflows Winner of BOSSIE, CODIE, OW2 and Gartner awards http://p.sf.net/sfu/Bonitasoft ___ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
Re: [Libusbx-devel] bulk transfer error centos 6.5 (32-bit) on VirtualBox running on Windows 7 (64-bit)
wow this was a hammer thanks for explaining it in clear profound words I will keep it in mind before write another sentence to the libusb-devel list. Thanks and have a nice day Igor On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: Igor Furlan wrote: On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: One of the advantages of libusb is that it crosses platforms. Why don't you run your code on Windows? Yes I could,,, but I wrote already few other utilities on LINUX (mostly GPIB related). I would like to continue on Linux. On top of that, licensing is free, no virues, upgrading linux require just a recompile of my utilities, stability, reliability, abundance of programming/scripting tools so, the users can use my utilities within any programming environment they are comfortable with. Like octave, shells,c, C++, Ruby, Perl, Pascal adn as a command line. OK, but you are intentionally overlooking the very important point that YOUR USERS ARE ALREADY RUNNING WINDOWS. You said this yourself. They already have licenses. They already have virus checkers. They already know how to launch programs and interact. They do not know Octave, bash, Ruby, Perl, or Pascal. You are asking them to run an additional rather intrusive tool (VirtualBox) so they can run an entirely unfamiliar environment just so you can feel religiously pure in your development. Your upgrade argument is also silly. An upgrade of Windows doesn't require ANY recompiling of your tools and utilities. The old binaries just keep on working. Microsoft has spent a vast fortune to ensure that the Fortune 100 companies don't have to do any work on their line-of-business tools to slip in an operating system upgrade. Linux developers, on the other hand, tend to favor purity over compatibility. Working remotely is a plus... etc ..Stuff I wrote in 2002/03 in my former company is still in use today, 12 years later. It was written for RedHat 8 2012 and just recompiled on CentOS 6. You're just making stuff up that doesn't have any basis in fact. The Windows remote access tools are just as good or better than the remote access tools on Linux. I'm still running Windows tools that I wrote and last compiled in 1995. Now that I'm running a 64-bit Windows, my 25-year-old 16-bit tools no longer run, but I've known that was coming for 10 years. It's interesting that you tried to use backwards compatibility as an argument. As a driver writer, I know that Windows has the best backwards compatibility behavior of ANY of the major operating systems. The video capture driver BINARIES that I wrote for Windows 98SE way back in the 20th Century still run in Windows 8. With a Linux kernel driver, you often don't even get SOURCE compatibility between version x.y.z and x.y.z+1. -- Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com Providenza Boekelheide, Inc. -- Open source business process management suite built on Java and Eclipse Turn processes into business applications with Bonita BPM Community Edition Quickly connect people, data, and systems into organized workflows Winner of BOSSIE, CODIE, OW2 and Gartner awards http://p.sf.net/sfu/Bonitasoft ___ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel -- You can't run an economy where the financial sector is making 40 percent of the profits. former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker 2009 -- Open source business process management suite built on Java and Eclipse Turn processes into business applications with Bonita BPM Community Edition Quickly connect people, data, and systems into organized workflows Winner of BOSSIE, CODIE, OW2 and Gartner awards http://p.sf.net/sfu/Bonitasoft ___ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
Re: [Libusbx-devel] bulk transfer error centos 6.5 (32-bit) on VirtualBox running on Windows 7 (64-bit)
Well Igor, Tim put it a bit more bluntly than I perhaps would, I actually refrained from making a comment ... but your post came across as Linux evangelism so I'm not surprised that it provoked a comment... you kind of asked for it. You may not agree with what Tim wrote but you might still take away from this that if your users are already using Windows then using a virtual machine with linux, especially when you are having problem clearly related to it seems quite the wrong way to go about it. And for the record I agree with most what Tim wrote about Windows though I dislike Windows. br Kusti On 24/06/2014 21:13, Igor Furlan igor.fur...@gmail.com wrote: wow this was a hammer thanks for explaining it in clear profound words I will keep it in mind before write another sentence to the libusb-devel list. Thanks and have a nice day Igor On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 9:42 AM, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: Igor Furlan wrote: On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 10:50 AM, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: One of the advantages of libusb is that it crosses platforms. Why don't you run your code on Windows? Yes I could,,, but I wrote already few other utilities on LINUX (mostly GPIB related). I would like to continue on Linux. On top of that, licensing is free, no virues, upgrading linux require just a recompile of my utilities, stability, reliability, abundance of programming/scripting tools so, the users can use my utilities within any programming environment they are comfortable with. Like octave, shells,c, C++, Ruby, Perl, Pascal adn as a command line. OK, but you are intentionally overlooking the very important point that YOUR USERS ARE ALREADY RUNNING WINDOWS. You said this yourself. They already have licenses. They already have virus checkers. They already know how to launch programs and interact. They do not know Octave, bash, Ruby, Perl, or Pascal. You are asking them to run an additional rather intrusive tool (VirtualBox) so they can run an entirely unfamiliar environment just so you can feel religiously pure in your development. Your upgrade argument is also silly. An upgrade of Windows doesn't require ANY recompiling of your tools and utilities. The old binaries just keep on working. Microsoft has spent a vast fortune to ensure that the Fortune 100 companies don't have to do any work on their line-of-business tools to slip in an operating system upgrade. Linux developers, on the other hand, tend to favor purity over compatibility. Working remotely is a plus... etc ..Stuff I wrote in 2002/03 in my former company is still in use today, 12 years later. It was written for RedHat 8 2012 and just recompiled on CentOS 6. You're just making stuff up that doesn't have any basis in fact. The Windows remote access tools are just as good or better than the remote access tools on Linux. I'm still running Windows tools that I wrote and last compiled in 1995. Now that I'm running a 64-bit Windows, my 25-year-old 16-bit tools no longer run, but I've known that was coming for 10 years. It's interesting that you tried to use backwards compatibility as an argument. As a driver writer, I know that Windows has the best backwards compatibility behavior of ANY of the major operating systems. The video capture driver BINARIES that I wrote for Windows 98SE way back in the 20th Century still run in Windows 8. With a Linux kernel driver, you often don't even get SOURCE compatibility between version x.y.z and x.y.z+1. -- Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com Providenza Boekelheide, Inc. - - Open source business process management suite built on Java and Eclipse Turn processes into business applications with Bonita BPM Community Edition Quickly connect people, data, and systems into organized workflows Winner of BOSSIE, CODIE, OW2 and Gartner awards http://p.sf.net/sfu/Bonitasoft ___ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel -- You can't run an economy where the financial sector is making 40 percent of the profits. former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker 2009 -- Open source business process management suite built on Java and Eclipse Turn processes into business applications with Bonita BPM Community Edition Quickly connect people, data, and systems into organized workflows Winner of BOSSIE, CODIE, OW2 and Gartner awards http://p.sf.net/sfu/Bonitasoft ___ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel -- Kustaa Nyholm Research Manager, Software Research and Technology Division PLANMECA OY Asentajankatu 6 00880 HELSINKI FINLAND Please note our new
Re: [Libusbx-devel] bulk transfer error centos 6.5 (32-bit) on VirtualBox running on Windows 7 (64-bit)
On Jun 22, 2014, at 1:00 PM, Igor Furlan igor.fur...@gmail.com wrote: Now I am facing another problem. A call to usb_claim_interface returns 0 (meaning call was OK). The next call, after the usb_claim_interface, is a call to usb_control_msg. It returns -110 (aka it fails). You know that -110 tells you more than just “it fails”, right? Errno 110 is ETIMEDOUT. Do you have a very short timeout? Timing in a VM is somewhat “flexible”. Reminder: I am running this on a CentOS 6.5 as the __guest__ using VirtualBOX on WIN7 as the host. Running the program on CentOS 6.5 on REAL hardware works flawlessly. At some point, you have to decide what this is worth to you. Some of the VM managers don’t do a perfect job of USB forwarding. -- Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com Providenza Boekelheide, Inc. -- HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data. Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing Easy Data Exploration http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems ___ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
Re: [Libusbx-devel] bulk transfer error centos 6.5 (32-bit) on VirtualBox running on Windows 7 (64-bit)
On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 11:41 PM, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com wrote: On Jun 22, 2014, at 1:00 PM, Igor Furlan igor.fur...@gmail.com wrote: . It returns -110 (aka it fails). You know that -110 tells you more than just “it fails”, right? Errno 110 is ETIMEDOUT. Do you have a very short timeout? Timing in a VM is somewhat “flexible”. No, I did not know. To be honest with you, I did not look for. My bad. Sorry. About Do you have a very short timeout? I do not know. How do I change (increase) the 'timeout' ? I am running this on a CentOS 6.5 as the __guest__ using VirtualBOX on WIN7 as the host. Running the program on CentOS 6.5 on REAL hardware works flawlessly. At some point, you have to decide what this is worth to you. Some of the VM managers don’t do a perfect job of USB forwarding. Yes, I was afraid about that. Unfortunately, not using VM would be a major setback. In a company I work, we do not want to have in a lab too many PCs on benches. But, all of the app engineers do have MS Windows desktops/laptops. So, using VM, with Lunux installed, is a nice solution. I was able to make GPIB working with GPIB-USB addapter (Agilent and National Instrument). -- You can't run an economy where the financial sector is making 40 percent of the profits. former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker 2009 -- HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data. Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing Easy Data Exploration http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems___ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
Re: [Libusbx-devel] bulk transfer error centos 6.5 (32-bit) on VirtualBox running on Windows 7 (64-bit)
Igor Furlan wrote: On Sun, Jun 22, 2014 at 11:41 PM, Tim Roberts t...@probo.com mailto:t...@probo.com wrote: On Jun 22, 2014, at 1:00 PM, Igor Furlan igor.fur...@gmail.com mailto:igor.fur...@gmail.com wrote: . It returns -110 (aka it fails). You know that -110 tells you more than just “it fails”, right? Errno 110 is ETIMEDOUT. Do you have a very short timeout? Timing in a VM is somewhat “flexible”. No, I did not know. To be honest with you, I did not look for. My bad. Sorry. About Do you have a very short timeout? I do not know. How do I change (increase) the 'timeout' ? Did you check the API documentation? The last parameter to usb_control_msg is the timeout in milliseconds. To a certain extent, however, I am just blowing smoke. Control messages usually complete very quickly. Your symptoms seem to indicate some more fundamental problem, and I don't know what to suggest. One of the advantages of libusb is that it crosses platforms. Why don't you run your code on Windows? -- Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com Providenza Boekelheide, Inc. -- HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data. Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing Easy Data Exploration http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems___ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
Re: [Libusbx-devel] bulk transfer error centos 6.5 (32-bit) on VirtualBox running on Windows 7 (64-bit)
On Jun 21, 2014, at 9:01 PM, Igor Furlan igor.fur...@gmail.com wrote: I am trying to run I2C interface board (http://nanorivertech.com/viperboard.html) on CentOS 6.5 installed on virtual machine (VirtualBox) which runs on MS WINDOWS 7. When I run my small CLI program, I get back libusb: error [op_set_configuration] failed, error -1 errno 110 libusb: error [submit_bulk_transfer] submiturb failed error -1 errno=2 libusb: error [submit_bulk_transfer] submiturb failed error -1 errno=2 The very same CLI program runs flawlessly on CentOS 6.5 on real hardware. It runs on 32-bit and 64-bit machine. Windows does a SetConfiguration when the driver loads. Some hardware doesn’t like getting multiple SetConfiguration requests. Try removing the call to usb_set_configuration. -- Tim Roberts, t...@probo.com Providenza Boekelheide, Inc. -- HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data. Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing Easy Data Exploration http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems ___ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
Re: [Libusbx-devel] bulk transfer error centos 6.5 (32-bit) on VirtualBox running on Windows 7 (64-bit)
Tim, thanks for the reply. I've removed the call to usb_set_configuration. The Error message went away. Now I am facing another problem. A call to usb_claim_interface returns 0 (meaning call was OK). The next call, after the usb_claim_interface, is a call to usb_control_msg. It returns -110 (aka it fails). What should I do to debug this ? Or, even better, what should I do to make this call pass ? Igor P.S: Reminder: I am running this on a CentOS 6.5 as the __guest__ using VirtualBOX on WIN7 as the host. Running the program on CentOS 6.5 on REAL hardware works flawlessly. -- HPCC Systems Open Source Big Data Platform from LexisNexis Risk Solutions Find What Matters Most in Your Big Data with HPCC Systems Open Source. Fast. Scalable. Simple. Ideal for Dirty Data. Leverages Graph Analysis for Fast Processing Easy Data Exploration http://p.sf.net/sfu/hpccsystems ___ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
