Date: Sun, 9 Feb 2014 18:32:29 +0000 From: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@FreeBSD.org> To: Juergen Lock <nox@jelal.kn-bremen.de> Cc: freebsd-emulation@FreeBSD.org, "Wojciech A. Koszek" <wkoszek@FreeBSD.org>, bapt@FreeBSD.org, freebsd-usb@FreeBSD.org, hselasky@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: CFT: Re: linux libusb again, I made an updated port... Message-ID: <6A6EDDBE-509E-45F2-961D-3EC3788CAD9C@FreeBSD.org> In-Reply-To: <20140209135905.GA13024@enceladus10.kn-bremen.de> References: <20140207201208.GA59695@enceladus10.kn-bremen.de> <20140207204928.GD12994@FreeBSD.org> <20140208084546.GA74796@enceladus10.kn-bremen.de> <20140209025624.GE12994@FreeBSD.org> <20140209135905.GA13024@enceladus10.kn-bremen.de>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On 09 Feb 2014, at 13:59 , Juergen Lock <nox@jelal.kn-bremen.de> wrote: Hi guys, > On Sun, Feb 09, 2014 at 02:56:24AM +0000, Wojciech A. Koszek wrote: >> On sob, lut 08, 2014 at 09:45:46 +0100, Juergen Lock wrote: >>> 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 My stuff may be out of date, but it was all tested and working.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.) >>> >> >> Juergen, >> >> I think this package is useful and is looking for maintainer, so if you have >> time and energy, I'm OK with upgrading it, but I suggest testing it first. >> Bjoern might be interested too. >> > You mean bz@ ? Cc'd. I tried testing lsusb from debian sid but it printed Thanks. > nothing, neither with my nor with your older version, but maybe it's just > `too new' for our current linuxolator. I got a lsusb to work after a bit more hacking. But that wasn’t the end of the story. > >>>> 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.) >> >> I guess it's the same stuff if the code is there with no modification. If we >> could have this port checked in to the ports/ repository, this would be >> great. Basically I'd concentrate on delivering good end-user experience >> >> Thanks for working on it. Lots of people will apprecite it. >> > Ok so let's wait for more testers then? I’ll give it a spin the next days. Since I last talked to some of you I had a lot of findings yet I had not been able to make any possible solution to fully work yet. The in-tree which supposedly should compile with a Ubuntu was unfortunately ruled out the earliest:( Some had glibc dependencies I kicked out which the F10 (our current default) environment didn’t provide, others are just not doing the right thing in some cases and required hacking. In the end I stayed with Wojciech’s version as it was the best option to start with and I could make the most progress quickly. /bz — Bjoern A. Zeeb ????????? ??? ??????? ??????: '??? ??? ???? ?????? ??????? ?? ?? ??????? ??????? ??? ????? ????? ???? ?????? ?? ????? ????', ????????? ?????????, "??? ????? ?? ?????", ?.???
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6A6EDDBE-509E-45F2-961D-3EC3788CAD9C>