Hi, 2010/6/3 Robert Schwebel <[email protected]>: > On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 08:29:33PM +0200, Robert Schwebel wrote: >> On Thu, Jun 03, 2010 at 07:55:31PM +0200, Remy Bohmer wrote: >> > Signed-off-by: Remy Bohmer <[email protected]> >> > --- >> > rules/libusb.make | 2 +- >> > 1 files changed, 1 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) >> > >> > diff --git a/rules/libusb.make b/rules/libusb.make >> > index 3075798..aa14659 100644 >> > --- a/rules/libusb.make >> > +++ b/rules/libusb.make >> > @@ -16,7 +16,7 @@ PACKAGES-$(PTXCONF_LIBUSB) += libusb >> > # >> > # Paths and names >> > # >> > -LIBUSB_VERSION := 1.0.6 >> > +LIBUSB_VERSION := 1.0.8 >> >> libusb-1.0.6 has patches, are they obsolete? > > Hmm, strange, I must have missed the trac thread. I don't really > remember a test case, will search...
There is only 1 single patch there that adds 2 libraries during linking, but it does not tell why these libraries were needed. I can find no reason to apply this patch any more, since the library compiles just fine without it, and even the testtools we use (including libusb-compat) that use this library link just fine... If you know of a reason to keep the patch I could forward port it, otherwise I will update the patch to drop this patch from the tree. Kind regards, Remy -- ptxdist mailing list [email protected]
