Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 18 Apr 2012 09:15:09 +0200
From:      Matthias Apitz <guru@unixarea.de>
To:        Hans Petter Selasky <hselasky@c2i.net>
Cc:        Bruce Cran <bruce@cran.org.uk>, freebsd-usb@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: dfu-util 0.5
Message-ID:  <20120418071509.GA1296@tiny>
In-Reply-To: <201204172205.43267.hselasky@c2i.net>
References:  <20120417100147.GA2557@tiny> <20120417185216.GA1306@tiny> <201204172158.36499.hselasky@c2i.net> <201204172205.43267.hselasky@c2i.net>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
El día Tuesday, April 17, 2012 a las 10:05:43PM +0200, Hans Petter Selasky escribió:

> On Tuesday 17 April 2012 21:58:36 Hans Petter Selasky wrote:
> > Hi Matthias,
> > 
> > I reviewed the dfu-util code and there is a bug there with regard to libusb
> > usage.
> > 
> > Can you try the attached patch. It fixes a duplicate libusb open bug.
> > 
> > --HPS
> 
> Found a small bug. Try updated patch.
> 
> --HPS


Hi,

Thanks, but the patch failed in two places:

$ rm -rf dfu-util-0.5
$ tar xzf dfu-util-0.5.tar.gz 
$ cd dfu-util-0.5/src
$ patch < ~/dfu-util.patch 
Hmm...  Looks like a unified diff to me...
The text leading up to this was:
--------------------------
|diff --git a/src/main.c b/src/main.c
|index 8986859..46f0e01 100644
|--- a/src/main.c
|+++ b/src/main.c
--------------------------
Patching file main.c using Plan A...
Hunk #1 succeeded at 63.
Hunk #2 failed at 76.
Hunk #3 failed at 86.
Hunk #4 succeeded at 114 (offset -4 lines).
Hunk #5 succeeded at 148 (offset -4 lines).
Hunk #6 succeeded at 168 (offset -4 lines).
Hunk #7 succeeded at 190 (offset -4 lines).
Hunk #8 succeeded at 254 (offset -1 lines).
Hunk #9 succeeded at 287 (offset -4 lines).
Hunk #10 succeeded at 931 (offset -18 lines).
2 out of 10 hunks failed--saving rejects to main.c.rej
done

was your diff against the original dfu-util-0.5.tar.gz?

Thanks

	matthias

-- 
Matthias Apitz
e <guru@unixarea.de> - w http://www.unixarea.de/
UNIX since V7 on PDP-11, UNIX on mainframe since ESER 1055 (IBM /370)
UNIX on x86 since SVR4.2 UnixWare 2.1.2, FreeBSD since 2.2.5



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20120418071509.GA1296>