On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 10:42:10PM +0100, Pete Batard wrote:
Hi,
It with pleasure that I would like to announce the release of
libusbx 1.0.13. This version brings the following notable changes:
* [MAJOR] Fix a typo in the API with struct libusb_config_descriptor
where MaxPower was used
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 07:59:40PM +0300, Kustaa Nyholm wrote:
On 24.9.2012 18.03, Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
libusbx as it's developers really don't care about their users.
A bit richt, I think, to say that libusbx developers do not care
about their users.
I don't think so.
On 24.9.2012 18.03, Greg KH gre...@linuxfoundation.org wrote:
libusbx as it's developers really don't care about their users.
A bit richt, I think, to say that libusbx developers do not care
about their users.
To be constructive can you name the broken programs (in addition
to the already
Hi,
On 09/24/2012 05:03 PM, Greg KH wrote:
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 10:42:10PM +0100, Pete Batard wrote:
Hi,
It with pleasure that I would like to announce the release of
libusbx 1.0.13. This version brings the following notable changes:
* [MAJOR] Fix a typo in the API with struct
On 2012.09.24 18:24, Greg KH wrote:
I don't think so. Remember, usbutils is the _one_ libusb package that
everyone has on their system. The fact that the libusbx release wasn't
tested with that package makes me wonder how it was tested at all.
Greg,
We made the conscious decision to
On Mon, Sep 24, 2012 at 07:33:08PM +0100, Pete Batard wrote:
But the problem really is that libusb (and libusbx prior to v1.0.13)
has a typo that makes it deviate from the USB specs, which left
uswith 3 choices:
1. leave the typo as is, and say It's fine to deviate from the USB
specs for
