On pią, lut 07, 2014 at 09:12:08 +0100, Juergen Lock wrote:
> This came up on irc so I tried to build a linux libusb port (before
> I learned about ports/146895), mine uses linux_base-gentoo-stage3
> like linux_kdump with a src/lib/libusb head snapshot so it's more
> up to date than wkoszek's build (ports/146895), and it's really
> easy to update it again. Also maybe it can be used as linux
> libusb-1.0.so too; I didn't actually test it tho.
> Should this be committed? Is wkoszek's version better since it
> also builds on < 10.x? Comments welcome...
> wkoszek's version:
> 10/amd64 package:
> (built via:
> poudriere bulk -v -j 10amd64 -p custom devel/linux_libusb
> - btw for some reason the dependency emulators/linux_base-gentoo-stage3
> doesn't build for 10i386 in poudriere bulk, I get a pkg segfault. bapt
What would be the reason for this update?
My stuff may be out of date, but it was all tested and working. I verified
it with Linux'ish lsusb(1) and USB-based FPGA JTAG programmer, for which
this stuff was written.
Can you show the diff between USB code from src/lib and from the distfile?
Instead of having a port with .c code, I'd drive towards having src/lib
changes (if any) be commited. And then that port only has to do:
cp -rf src/lib/libusb port/tmp/dir
and build it with different -DDEFINES if necessary.
Wojciech A. Koszek
firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-usb-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"