Thank you.
I reverted the patch, but I did not push it yet, just because we don’t need to
trigger a build for such a small change.
-Michael
> On 1 Jul 2025, at 16:04, Adolf Belka wrote:
>
> Hi Michael,
>
> I saw that my libusb patch with the comment has been merged.
>
> As I indicated below
Hi Michael,
I saw that my libusb patch with the comment has been merged.
As I indicated below, I have realised that the problem I was looking at for a
user was due to a different issue so that libusb patch with the addition of the
comment can be rejected and reverted.
Regards,
Adolf.
On 01/
Hi Michael,
Earlier this year someone had a problem where nut wouldn't work because it was
not linked to the correct libusb library and libusb had been updated in 2024. I
thought that this had been a problem of a failure in a library link after an
update because nut had not been shipped.
With
Hello Adolf,
Could you tell us my about why this is necessary?
The library should have a stable ABI so whenever they are being compiled
independently from each other, they should still work.
Best,
-Michael
> On 30 Jun 2025, at 17:12, Adolf Belka wrote:
>
> - libusb is a run time requirement
- libusb is a run time requirement for nut
Signed-off-by: Adolf Belka
---
lfs/libusb | 1 +
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+)
diff --git a/lfs/libusb b/lfs/libusb
index 4b12242d7..0ff89ff75 100644
--- a/lfs/libusb
+++ b/lfs/libusb
@@ -25,6 +25,7 @@
include Config
VER= 1.0.29
+# Ship nu
