On Mon, 2012-10-29 at 09:06 +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> The other question is whether the "competing program" is really
> cross-platform or not.
The "competing program" is strictly 32-bit Windows. This was where I had
a major advantage: mine is written in Java 6 and runs on 32/64-bit Linux
(it r
On Mon, 2012-10-29 at 01:15 +0100, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Find out exactly how those commands get sent, and find a method to
> send them which is outside the USB domain if possible, since that
> will be both simpler for you to implement *and* will provide a
> significantly better user experience.
T
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 7:51 AM, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> Great you know what you want. It may be possible to achieve what you
> want with libwdi+libusbx, the problem is that 1 to 2 seconds maximum
> is not guaranteed if using libwdi to switch drivers, the process can take
> minutes.
The other quest
therau2000 wrote:
> > > In that case, will you please add "SCSI Pass Through" capability
> > > to libusbx?
> >
> > I won't, but maybe someone else will.
>
> Sorry, I thought you were making all decisions regarding where
> libusbx is going...
Pete Batard might tell you that I have no authority in
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 4:52 AM, therau2000 wrote:
> That is not at all confusing to me: with "SCSI Pass Through" libusbx will
> likely allow me to communicate with my Device while maintaining its
> removable drive capabilities. It may also eliminate (I hope) the annoying
> side effect of detachin
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 4:52 AM, therau2000 wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-10-28 at 20:57 +0100, Peter Stuge wrote:
>
> therau2000 wrote:
>> In that case, will you please add "SCSI Pass Through" capability
>> to libusbx?
>
> I won't, but maybe someone else will.
>
> Sorry, I thought you were making all dec
On Mon, Oct 29, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Sven Köhler wrote:
> Am 13.10.2012 03:03, schrieb Xiaofan Chen:
>> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 2:15 AM, Orin Eman wrote:
>>> Personally, I think it's better to supply native build methods than to try
>>> to force autotools to work on systems that don't support it.
>>
On Sun, 2012-10-28 at 16:57 -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Oct 2012, therau2000 wrote:
> > When program xusb fails to claim interface 0, it would seem possible to
> > "activate SCSI Pass Through". Further calls to libusb_bulk_transfer
> > could then be transparent to the application program
On Sun, 28 Oct 2012, therau2000 wrote:
> > Unfortunately libusbx does not automatically fall back to the
> > SCSI Pass Through.
>
> I do understand that libusbx does not automatically fall back to "SCSI
> Pass Through". But under Linux, when program xusb fails to claim
> interface 0, it does:
>
On Sun, 2012-10-28 at 20:57 +0100, Peter Stuge wrote:
> therau2000 wrote:
> > In that case, will you please add "SCSI Pass Through" capability
> > to libusbx?
>
> I won't, but maybe someone else will.
Sorry, I thought you were making all decisions regarding where libusbx
is going... Who do I ask
therau2000 wrote:
> > > You need to fork libusbx and create your own SCSI Pass Through
> > > backend by yourself if you really want to use libusbx.
> >
> > On the other hand libusbx already does this for HID class, so I
> > don't see why mass storage would be less worthy.
>
> In that case, will y
On Sun, 2012-10-28 at 20:24 +0100, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> > You need to fork libusbx and create your own SCSI Pass Through
> > backend by yourself if you really want to use libusbx.
>
> On the other hand libusbx already does this for HID class, so I don't
> see why mass storag
Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> You need to fork libusbx and create your own SCSI Pass Through
> backend by yourself if you really want to use libusbx.
On the other hand libusbx already does this for HID class, so I don't
see why mass storage would be less worthy.
therau2000 wrote:
> Before I tried to use
On Sun, 2012-10-28 at 21:12 +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 8:09 PM, therau2000 wrote:
> > On Sun, 2012-10-28 at 11:51 +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> >
> > Given this scenario:
> > 1-uninstall any driver installed by zadig.exe;
> > 2-use example program xusb as a viable test pr
Am 13.10.2012 03:03, schrieb Xiaofan Chen:
> On Sat, Oct 13, 2012 at 2:15 AM, Orin Eman wrote:
>> Personally, I think it's better to supply native build methods than to try
>> to force autotools to work on systems that don't support it.
>
> Me too. So autotools for Linux and BSDs, XCode for Mac O
On Sun, Oct 28, 2012 at 8:09 PM, therau2000 wrote:
> On Sun, 2012-10-28 at 11:51 +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>
> Given this scenario:
> 1-uninstall any driver installed by zadig.exe;
> 2-use example program xusb as a viable test program;
> 3-use a USB memory stick for testing as it will show up as
On Sun, 2012-10-28 at 11:51 +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> You might take a look at this one if your device use raw
> SCSI Pass Through Interface.
>
> It seems to work under Linux and Windows. But I think it will not work
> under Mac OS X due to the fact that Mac OS X does not seem to support
> th
17 matches
Mail list logo
