From owner-freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Feb 8 08:47:42 2014 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [8.8.178.115]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CA0B0F30; Sat, 8 Feb 2014 08:47:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.kn-bremen.de (gelbbaer.kn-bremen.de [78.46.108.116]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4A92A179A; Sat, 8 Feb 2014 08:47:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: by smtp.kn-bremen.de (Postfix, from userid 10) id 5ADF11E007B7; Sat, 8 Feb 2014 09:47:37 +0100 (CET) Received: from enceladus10.kn-bremen.de (noident@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by enceladus10.kn-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id s188jljg074961; Sat, 8 Feb 2014 09:45:47 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from nox@enceladus10.kn-bremen.de) Received: (from nox@localhost) by enceladus10.kn-bremen.de (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) id s188jlgZ074960; Sat, 8 Feb 2014 09:45:47 +0100 (CET) (envelope-from nox) From: Juergen Lock Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2014 09:45:46 +0100 To: "Wojciech A. Koszek" Subject: Re: linux libusb again, I made an updated port... Message-ID: <20140208084546.GA74796@enceladus10.kn-bremen.de> References: <20140207201208.GA59695@enceladus10.kn-bremen.de> <20140207204928.GD12994@FreeBSD.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20140207204928.GD12994@FreeBSD.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Cc: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org, Juergen Lock , freebsd-usb@FreeBSD.org, hselasky@FreeBSD.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-emulation@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17 Precedence: list List-Id: Development of Emulators of other operating systems List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2014 08:47:42 -0000 On Fri, Feb 07, 2014 at 08:49:28PM +0000, Wojciech A. Koszek wrote: > On pi??, lut 07, 2014 at 09:12:08 +0100, Juergen Lock wrote: > > Hi! > > > > 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: > > > > http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=146895 > > > > Mine: > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~nox/tmp/linux_libusb.shar > > > > Distfile: > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~nox/tmp/distfiles/linux_libusb-11.0r261448.tar.bz2 > > > > 10/amd64 package: > > > > http://people.freebsd.org/~nox/tmp/packages/10amd64/linux_libusb-11.0r261448.txz > > > > (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 > > Cc'd...) > > > > Juergen, Hi! > > 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. > I was just thinking an updated version may be useful, but if it's already working for everyone maybe less so... Or would it work as a linux libusb-1.0.so too? I know the libusb 1.0 stuff added some functions since 9.x at least... maybe hps would know (Cc'd.) > Can you show the diff between USB code from src/lib and from the distfile? > That's just a checkout from head, see the port Makefile for how it's generated. (.if defined(BOOTSTRAP)...) > 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. > That's what I orginally had but hps suggested I check out from head instead. (Tho that was when I couldn't get it building at first, which turned out to be just a CFLAGS -I problem so the 10.0 code should now build this way as well.) Thanx, Juergen