On Thursday 26 April 2012 19:54:00 Robert Millan wrote: > El 25 d’abril de 2012 23:20, Hans Petter Selasky > > <[email protected]> ha escrit: > > Isn't libusb2debian a binary compatible drop-in replacement for > > applications which are compiled with the linux libusb. > > By linux libusb do you mean the one from http://www.libusb.org/ ? > AFAIK this one is a portable library, at least it builds on > GNU/kFreeBSD too.
The one from libusb.org does not work under FreeBSD. > I wasn't directly involved in this episode. We're providing both > (libusb from libusb.org and libusb from FreeBSD) but I'm not sure why. > I suppose the one from FreeBSD has better support for kernel of > FreeBSD? Or perhaps because they're not API-compatible and > applications could need either of them? > > > If applications are compiled from > > source there is no problem, though I see some applications like > > python-libusb that hardcode structure sizes. > > That sounds like a problem. Could you be more specific? (and put > [email protected] on CC) > > > Just leave the libusb2debian as-is then, and we'll have this in once the > > 10-version is out. > > Ok, but if you changed ABI in 10-current, then please do bump the > soname. We have a huge amount of trouble every time an ABI bump is > missed (this happened with libgeom a while ago). Yes, this is done now. --HPS -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [email protected] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [email protected] Archive: http://lists.debian.org/[email protected]
