Hi,
On 09/22/2012 01:34 AM, Chuck Cook wrote:
> What surprised me was that a usb library was crashing the system. What
> does the USB bus have to do with the system login? Yet, the bug was
> very repeatable. Somebody that knows a lot more than I, about how Linux
> works, should probably investig
On 09/22/2012 08:18 AM, Pete Batard wrote:
> On 22 September 2012 00:34, Chuck Cook wrote:
>> What surprised me was that a usb library was crashing the system. What
>> does the USB bus have to do with the system login?
> Support for fancy non HID or accessibility input devices maybe? brltty
> see
On 22 September 2012 00:34, Chuck Cook wrote:
> What surprised me was that a usb library was crashing the system. What
> does the USB bus have to do with the system login?
Support for fancy non HID or accessibility input devices maybe? brltty
seems to rely on libusb.
> Yet, the bug was
> very re
What surprised me was that a usb library was crashing the system. What
does the USB bus have to do with the system login? Yet, the bug was
very repeatable. Somebody that knows a lot more than I, about how Linux
works, should probably investigate that.
On 09/21/2012 01:39 PM, Pete Batard wrote
On 2012.09.21 17:52, Chuck Cook wrote:
> So far version: 1.0.13 nano: 10575 appears to be working without problems.
I'm happy to hear that. Thanks for the report.
Regards,
/Pete
--
Got visibility?
Most devs has no idea
Hi,
On 06/03/2012 04:15 PM, Chuck Cook wrote:
> Okay, when your ready, I have a x64 AMD quad core running FC17 with all
> the latest updates. I am wiling to give any libusbx packages a try
> before you release them into the wild.
To be clear, I don't plan on doing a libusbx update for Fedora-1
Okay, when your ready, I have a x64 AMD quad core running FC17 with all
the latest updates. I am wiling to give any libusbx packages a try
before you release them into the wild.
Chuck
On 06/03/2012 09:51 AM, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 06/03/2012 01:12 PM, Chuck Cook wrote:
>> libusbx
Hi,
On 06/03/2012 01:12 PM, Chuck Cook wrote:
> libusbx doesn't appear to have made it into the available packages for
> Fedora 17. All I find is libusb 1.0.9.rc1 which is very out of date at
> this time.
I'm the Fedora libusb maintainer, and as Xiaofan already indicated I was too
late with gett
On Sun, Jun 3, 2012 at 7:12 PM, Chuck Cook wrote:
> libusbx doesn't appear to have made it into the available packages for
> Fedora 17. All I find is libusb 1.0.9.rc1 which is very out of date at
> this time.
I believe it was too late for Fedora 17 Release and it will probably be in
Fedora 18 an
