>> However, if Windows always considers a device with 0:0 in the device
>> descriptor an error, then the Windows backend should discard them.
>
> I don't think the Windows USB stack does any such thing, although if I
> were a real man I would have burned a device with / to test this.
>
Al
Peter Stuge wrote:
> Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> I think the warning message is a bit miss-leading. If libusbx found
>> /, then it should probably warn against unrecognized device.
> If Windows says that there is a 0:0 device when there is actually an
> error, and if this case is indistinguishab
On 2012.05.22 10:14, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> However, if Windows always considers a device with 0:0 in the device
>> descriptor an error, then the Windows backend should discard them.
>
> I believe that Windows always considers a device with 0:0 in the device
> descriptor as an error.
Yup. And the
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 5:11 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> I think the warning message is a bit miss-leading. If libusbx found
>> /, then it should probably warn against unrecognized device.
>
> If Windows says that there is a 0:0 device when there is actually an
> error,
Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> I think the warning message is a bit miss-leading. If libusbx found
> /, then it should probably warn against unrecognized device.
If Windows says that there is a 0:0 device when there is actually an
error, and if this case is indistinguishable from an OK device with
On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 1:38 AM, Tim Roberts wrote:
> Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> There is a warning, not so sure if it is really of importance or not.
>> ...
>> C:\work\libusbx\libusbx-1.0.11-win\examples\bin32>xusb.exe -d 0483:3748
>> Using libusbx v1.0.11.10499
>>
>> Opening device...
>> [timestamp]
Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> There is a warning, not so sure if it is really of importance or not.
> ...
> C:\work\libusbx\libusbx-1.0.11-win\examples\bin32>xusb.exe -d 0483:3748
> Using libusbx v1.0.11.10499
>
> Opening device...
> [timestamp] [threadID] facility level [function call]
>
