https://libusb.org/ticket/136
Not so sure if this is a real bug or not.
--
Xiaofan
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and
On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 4:52 AM, Rich von Lehe wrote:
> In lieu of set_configuration in this case (there is only one config),
> one process would claim_interface 0 and the other process would
> claim_interface 1. I have a suspicion that the underlying
> implementation in Libusb is locking the dev
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 5:14 PM, Jach Fong wrote:
> The xusb.exe in released 1.0.12 also have the same result.
>
> I think the problem mostly was caused by my device. It is a device
> I had built years ago using Silabs' F8051F320 and their Development tool
> Version 2.2 with included HID example
On Fri, Jun 29, 2012 at 6:02 AM, Pete Batard wrote:
> As promised. Hopefully this will silence the warnings raised by Clang on
> OS-X.
>
> And again, if someone wants to look into silencing that -std=gnu99 one,
> you're welcome to submit a patch. I'm not planning to look into it, but that
> doesn'
