Uri Lublin wrote: > Commit 4cccbed825fe1dc13812 accidently removed those calls, > when ! ifdef DYNAMIC_FDS blocks were removed.
Commit 4cccbed825fe1dc13812 removes the possibility to choose between DYNAMIC_FDS and not, and makes the previously optional behavior enforced, so the code in !defined() was likely removed on purpose. (DYNAMIC_FDS was on by default, so it has always been used on Windows since the code was introduced. There have been no comments on that code either way, however.) I'm not sure if DYNAMIC_FDS or not DYNAMIC_FDS is more correct. The comment documenting the define wasn't completely clear to me. Awesome if you can help clear this up? Thanks for looking into this! //Peter ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 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 security, mobile security and the latest in malware threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/ _______________________________________________ libusbx-devel mailing list libusbx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/libusbx-devel
