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
>
>--
>--
As complete outside to this thread observing from the far:
I don't understand Hans approach here.
I looks to me that here we have Miguel with a reproducible case where a
an infinite loop inside libusb can be triggered by disturbing the USB
communication externally without touching the code in an
On 24/11/2013 00:58, "Xiaofan Chen" wrote:
>
>What is the OS you are concerning here?
>
>And what do you mean by "detach the driver and
>still open the device?" For example, under Linux,
>you can detach the joystick driver and then use
>libusb to open and operate on the device. But then
>the origi
Hi,
this really OT for this list but I hope some one can
help me all the same.
I'm writing a HIDAPI like interface but with Java
and JNA only.
I can now enumerate the devices but when I try to
open my test HID device (a generic gamepad joystick)
I get errno 13 EACCES.
So I guess something has g
Hi,
is this list still active or has everyone moved to libusb-devel list?
br Kusti
This e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not
the intended recipient (or have received this e-mail in error) please notify
the sender immediately and destroy this e-mail. Any u
Hi,
this is not really on topic for libusbx but since I know the
people who hang there are very well versed in this I figured
this is one of the places to ask, since this has been
discussed before [1].
Of course tried to google for this but could not really
find a definite answer.
Background
On 20/06/2013 00:07, "Pete Batard" wrote:
>On 2013.06.19 18:09, Sean McBride wrote:
>>> I would have thought every one would
>>> run their compilers with (almost) every possible warning
>>> turned on
>
>Not gonna happen as far as I'm concerned.
I wasn't suggesting that you (or anyone should) I w
This is no criticism but I'm curious why there seems
to be so many of these kind small patches,example:
"A small patch for:
strerror.c:148: warning: comparison between signed and unsigned"
what I mean is that I would have thought every one would
run their compilers with (almost) every possible w
On 30/05/2013 10:44, "Xiaofan Chen" wrote:
>On Tue, May 28, 2013 at 6:25 PM, Hans de Goede
>wrote:
>> This patch adds the much requested libusb_strerror() function, taking
>>into
>> account all issues people raised wrt previous attempts.
>>
>> Criteria / Decisions underlying this implementation:
On 30/05/2013 10:35, "Johannes Stezenbach" wrote:
>How do native Windows programs handle thandle translations?
Sorry to jump in, especially as I've not followed the discussion
in detail (and the earlier discussion the more or less same discussion
on libusb-devel) and not specifically commenting a
On 18/05/2013 02:19, "Pete Batard" wrote:
> As a matter of fact, some unlikely people have already made a
>first step towards that [1]... ;)
...
>[1] https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/stable_api_nonsense.txt
Interesting reading, thanks.
I don't know these people but I formed my opinion a
On 12.4.2013 2.27, "Pete Batard" wrote:
> I'm getting kind of
>tired of people proposing yet another API, without any details of how
>it's actually going to be implemented for each of our 3 major platforms
>(Linux + OS X + Windows).
I'm with Pete here in that code for all platforms that tries to
On 1.4.2013 11.44, "Xiaofan Chen" wrote:
>
>I do not know much about Java but I do not quite
>understand your "pure Java" terminology.
Pure Java was Sun's marketing catch phrase to promote
programs/programming that required not other code
than Java code (besides what was included with the standa
On 1.4.2013 8.31, "Xiaofan Chen" wrote:
>On Sun, Mar 31, 2013 at 1:27 PM, Kustaa Nyholm
> wrote:
>> BUT under the hood libusbx uses the native API
>> on each platform to access USB right?
>>
>> And I can call any native API from Java with
>> JNA w
On 31.3.2013 8.27, "Kustaa Nyholm" wrote:
>Thanks, once I got the tip that it was usable in this situation
>I found the info from MS documentation too.
>
>
I meant UN-usable of course...
br Kusti
This e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information. If you
On 31.3.2013 1.56, "Xiaofan Chen" wrote:
>> Ref: http://www.osronline.com/showthread.cfm?link=239028
>> Tim Roberts wrote the following in the above thread,
>> "A right-click install simply runs the [DefaultInstall] section
>> and is only useful for non-PnP devices. It doesn't associate the
>> d
> I didn't think right-click/Install worked for driver inf files. It never has
> for me anyway.
Ok, if that is so then no point searching for the answer...thanks.
br Kusti
This e-mail may contain confidential or privileged information. If you are not
the int
Hi,
sorry for the OT but I felt the expertise on this
list might have answer on tap.
I've got a .inf file for my USB CDC ACM device
that works fine. However installing it requires
about million steps for the end user so I thought
I'd enable the installation by using right click/Install...
But s
On 27.2.2013 20.32, "Tim Roberts" wrote:
>Kustaa Nyholm wrote:
>> sorry to abuse this list with OT but since
>> I know a few members know about the driver
>> signing so I was hoping for a helpful word.
>>
>> I'm using a home brew USB CDC AMC vi
Hi,
sorry to abuse this list with OT but since
I know a few members know about the driver
signing so I was hoping for a helpful word.
I'm using a home brew USB CDC AMC virtual
serial port like device on Windows with
the Windows serial.sys driver and my own
.inf file.
Now will this approach work
On 15.2.2013 20.02, "Tim Roberts" wrote:
>Is someone actually coding up a first-draft hotplug solution to do some
>experimentation?
I don't no, but I don't think so, there is I believe an implementation
from Pete way back.
>
>There are two ways to design standard libraries. One way is to take
On 15.2.2013 5.26, "Nathan Hjelm" wrote:
>if the vendor wishes to abuse the HID spec to make development on Windows
>easier then libusb is not the answer.
I don't think they [vendors] try to make *development* easier,
they want to make *deployment* easier, that is the main goal
for most USB pro
On 14.2.2013 2.36, "Pete Batard" wrote:
>I'm sorry, but I don't get why we seem so hell bent (as it looks to me)
Well, no, it is just difficult to keep one's hands of the keyboard
when something 'interesting' surfaces. I'm in no hurry with hotplug,
I was just curious and wanted to get reactions
On 13.2.2013 15.23, "Hans de Goede" wrote:
>
>> In my thinking weather there is a driver or not is
>> logically a property of libusb_device and should
>> be queried from that handle and result in corresponding
>> error (LIBUSB_ERROR_NO_DRIVER) if passed to libusb_open().
>
>Apps which are actually
On 12.2.2013 12.29, "Hans de Goede" wrote:
> Currently the following events are defined:
>
>LIBUSB_HOTPLUG_EVENT_DEVICE_ARRIVED: A device has arrived and is ready to
>use
>LIBUSB_HOTPLUG_EVENT_DEVICE_LEFT: A device has left and is no longer
>available
>
>Not the best names ever, I would have call
On 13.2.2013 0.38, "Nathan Hjelm" wrote:
>
>Using descriptions like "stupid" for the proposed event names does
>nothing to advance the discussion on what the API for libusb 1.0 should
>look like. You, and others, have been given (and still have for a short
>time) an opportunity to help define the
On 12.2.2013 12.29, "Hans de Goede" wrote:
>On 02/12/2013 12:54 AM, Pete Batard wrote:
>>
>> Personally, the first thing I want out of hotplug from a libusbx/Windows
>> standpoint is to provide applications with the ability to notify users
>
>We can simply add:
>
>LIBUSB_HOTPLUG_EVENT_DRIVERLESS
On 12.2.2013 4.06, "Xiaofan Chen" wrote:
>
>2) The complexity of the event handling, I tend to believe
>this is the main motivation.
>
>To me 2) is really the one major problems for libusb-1.0
>API. Just read the libusbx documentation and you will
>realize that it is not that designed for Windows
On 12.2.2013 12.29, "Hans de Goede" wrote:
>
>I know, but I'm operating under the assumption that Nathan will eventually
>do a libusb release with his code, at which point having API compatibility
>would be good. And yes I know we don't completely agree on this :)
I disagree having API/ABI compat
On 11.2.2013 4.38, "Xiaofan Chen" wrote:
>
>Ubuntu is working toward that. On the other hand, I
>do not like Ubuntu Software center at all. I prefer
>Synaptic better and sometims use the command
>line apt.
I had high hopes for Ubuntu, but then Unity changed
it all and I had to give up on it, desp
On 10.2.2013 16.06, "Xiaofan Chen" wrote:
>>
>> Now, I find that disturbing this seems to imply something
>> that I as an application developer would not like.
>
>Why? That is kind of the norm for Linux. The user's
>system will either have a udev available or the
>other alternative mdev available.
On 10.2.2013 5.05, "Pete Batard" wrote:
>
>That's the way I see it as well. I can't help but feel concerned that
>once again we have an API that originated straight from POSIX
>environments, and that hasn't bothered much in trying to at least
>outline what it's gonna mean for Windows. I kind of re
On 10.2.2013 3.03, "Xiaofan Chen" wrote:
>
>I think the hotplug API proposed there is not complete
>and I am sure Pete will have some different ideas
>about the API. libusbx and libusb will probably diverge
>on the Hotplug API.
I'm all for diverging at this point if it makes technical
sense.
>
Hi,
I'm sure many here also watch the libusb-devel list,
perhaps excluding Pete.
They have made some progress in defining the hotplug
API...what is our standing on this?
Do we want to have a look at their vision, pick on it,
or what?
Has anyone actually had a peek?
As I'm not actively coding
On 9.2.2013 9.57, "Ramon Zambelli" wrote:
>On 09-Feb-13 8:12 AM, Kustaa Nyholm wrote:
>> On 9.2.2013 9.04, "Ramon Zambelli" wrote:
>>
>>> In previous post I saw people looking for a JAVA JNA wrapper for
>>>libusb.
>>> I put an eclips
On 9.2.2013 9.04, "Ramon Zambelli" wrote:
>In previous post I saw people looking for a JAVA JNA wrapper for libusb.
>I put an eclipse project which implements some of the libusb functions
>in JAVA at this link:
>https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B4q8NED649stNGdFVm8zRHVaYnM/edit?usp=shari
>ng
>It is
On 5.2.2013 17.56, "Lars Pötter" wrote:
>So the question is if it is possible to create a single jar file that
>includes everything needed to provide the libusbx API to a Java program
>and let it speak to USB Devices on Linux, Windows and Mac without a
>Driver installed ?
The experts should chime
On 5.2.2013 15.35, "Lars Pötter" wrote:
>
>> With JNA to access libusb it was pretty trivial. And now days there are
>> a number of ready made implementations available.
>
>I tried to talk a colleague into libUsb. He was responsible for the PC
>application and I was doing the firmware. But he said
On 9.11.2012 21.40, "Ted Middleton" wrote:
>
>I've built the samples on OSX, but it seems like there's a problem - I
>don't seem to be able to claim any of the interfaces for any of the mass
>storage devices I find.
>
>
>Is this a known issue? I know that on Windows, this sort of promiscuous
>inte
On 24.9.2012 22.31, "Greg KH" wrote:
>
>Um, breaking existing applications is not indicative of that, don't you
>agree?
You never make bad calls and you think this was a deliberate
attempt not to care for users? If you think it is a bug and a bad
choice, why not say it, instead of writing down t
On 24.9.2012 21.47, "Greg KH" wrote:
>
>And if I'm going to be forced to change my program, and libusbx has now
>shown that they don't care about their public api, well, I might as well
>just rewrite it to remove that dependancy completly, as it's obvious
>they don't know how to treat their users.
On 24.9.2012 21.50, "Greg KH" wrote:
>So, you are going to force me (hint, I'm the usbutils maintainer), to
>change my code because libusbx broke their API here? That's what other
>distros have already tried to tell me earlier today, and I'm going to
>push back hard and say that it is a bug in li
On 24.9.2012 18.03, "Greg KH" wrote:
>libusbx as it's developers really don't care about their users.
A bit richt, I think, to say that libusbx developers do not care
about their users.
To be constructive can you name the broken programs (in addition
to the already mentioned 'usbutils' ), so tha
On 30.8.2012 4.21, "Pete Batard" wrote:
>
>I doubt I'm the only one who'd prefer an API that solves actual
>problems, such as setting platform specific preferences, over an API
>that's been over sanitized for the sake of abstraction.
I'm with you on this one.
br Kusti
-
On 28.8.2012 7.32, "Xiaofan Chen" wrote:
>I meant to say "Take note there is no Mac OS X HID backend for
>libusbx yet".
Yes, I understood what you meant. I'm merely fishing for
something that might help shed some light to our issue.
Sorry for abusing this list.
>
>BTW, Nathan is opposed to the M
Hi List,
this is not (yet!) an libusbx question directly but since HID has been
introduced back to libusbx I hope some people who know the nitty gritty
details will hang around here and might give a hint or two.
we are working with a USB UVC camera that also represents itself as a HID
device so
On 7/25/12 02:07, "Luiz Andrade" wrote:
>
>Can you give me some advice to make this work on linux to?
>Maybe I can make my application use some gps program like gpsd or
>gpsbabel, making a frontend for the command line interface. Is that a
>good solution?
If you do not have a Linux API / library
On 6/8/12 05:02, "Xiaofan Chen" wrote:
>
>I think the name is not that bad and it is a bit difficult to change the
>name now that the infrastructure is there: libusbx.org domain name,
>Sourceforge project page, mailing list, and probably more importantly
>Linux distro's package name.
I find nothi
On 5/25/12 15:39, "Pete Batard" wrote:
>
>Personally I'd vote for using stderr always, on the grounds that:
+1 for that.
br Kusti
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's
+1 for UTF-8
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint securi
Months ago I asked about pointers to a good introduction to the intended
git workflow and got some. Today I tumbled on one. As the discussion,
especially on the libusb-devel list, often throws about terms like
feature branch, rebase etc etc I think someone not familiar with those
might benefit from
How about moving on to discuss things that actually move
the project forward...
--
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how
On 4/24/12 13:13, "Pete Batard" wrote:
>On 2012.04.24 07:38, Kustaa Nyholm wrote:
>> Thanks,but I think I was just curious for the actual technical issues
>> those new fields will cause.
>
>Well, to me the technical issue, is that in its current instance,
>P
On 4/24/12 03:45, "Pete Batard" wrote:
>
>If you think he's only been guilty of acting slowly, then how short your
>memory is...
>
>Remember his stance on RERO and his statement that it is possible to
>write code with no issues, and that getting early user feedback wasn't
>that important?
>Remembe
On 4/23/12 14:53, "Pete Batard" wrote:
>
>OK, maybe you are confused by the fact that I am using platform as a
>build environment rather than an actual platform system (mostly because
>Windows could be considered as 3 slightly different systems depending on
>whether your libusbx based app was buil
On 4/23/12 13:12, "Pete Batard" wrote:
>If we go this route it means that every time Peter wants us to implement
>an half-assed solution that we shouldn't follow in the first place, he
>just has to arrange a way to make an app crash when switching to
>libusbx, and lo and behold, we are forced to c
On 4/21/12 19:36, "Peter Stuge" wrote:
>On Windows and Mac OS X I agree with you and Orin, because there are
>few (no?) useful system-wide package managers. On Linux and BSD there
>is generally a reliable package manager which handles dependencies,
>thus avoiding the problem. I of course understan
On 4/21/12 08:58, "Jose Pablo" wrote:
>I understand that NOW its not a problem. But in a future may be a
>problem. So, why don' t change the names NOW and prevent future problems?
At the moment the priority is to the project of the ground
and get as many people as possible onboard. The purpose
o
On 4/21/12 07:36, "Jose Pablo" wrote:
>
>Its like you guys are forcing me to take a side.
In a way yes.
>
>Where is my freedom to choose if you are forcing me to choose?.
Some freedoms are inherently in conflict with other freedoms.
>Thats not good for an free and open source software.
Thats
Gentlemen (and I mean it),
I'm not sure if these lengthy and wordy discussion on rather
trivial matters are all to the good in the big picture...
When you add words you give people more handle and reason to
nitpick on words and the words then come in the way of the actual
subject matter.
I would
60 matches
Mail list logo
