Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 11 Feb 2001 13:45:37 -0700
From:      John Reynolds <jjreynold@home.com>
To:        Mikhail Teterin <mi@aldan.algebra.com>
Subject:   Re: ports/24703: New port of 'libusb' to commit to the 'devel' category
Message-ID:  <14982.63985.55237.755714@whale.home-net>
In-Reply-To: <3A86F3A8.F1A3FF8D@aldan.algebra.com>
References:  <3A86F3A8.F1A3FF8D@aldan.algebra.com>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help

[ On Sunday, February 11, Mikhail Teterin wrote: ]
> As a happy user of this port-candidate with my PowerShot S100,
> and a fresh committer, I'd commit this port, but I'm not sure
> about the name of the installed library -- libusb. It is too
> easily confused with our own libusb. Forget the -L/usr/local/lib
> in front of -lusb and instead of "not found" you get totally wierd
> errors :)
> 
> Do others view this as a problem? How can it be renamed?
> 
>     -mi

Thanks for your interest in commiting this port! I understand the naming
difficulties. For ports or other applications that use libusb in its current
format they would need to utilize the "libusb-config" script in order to use
the correct flags to build. I realize there is definitely "trouble brewing"
with two libraries named the same thing. This has come up on the usb-bsd
mailing list in the last week or two. Johannes E., creator of libusb, would
rather not change the name of the library. Somebody had asked whether or not
the BSDs should change their libusb to something along the lines of libhid or
libusbhid (since it only deals with HID) and the NetBSD USB stack author
(Lennart Augustsson) said this was something that probably should be done (see
http://lists.inteltec.com/wws/arc/usb-bsd/2001-02/msg00007.html). However,
there have been no details as to when such a rename might take place. Nick
Hibma has been out on holiday so we've not gotten his opinion or possible time
table as to when a rename might take place (i.e. RELENG_4 or -current only,
etc.).

My opinion is to commit the port and let people start using the library. If
gphoto and/or gphoto2 ports can be configured to use the libusb-config script
to get the right arguments, things "should be ok" (notice the quotes). This
will leave a naming conflict open now, but meantime we can discuss how and when
to rename BSD's libusb to something else[1].

-Jr

[1] There are lots of options here, up to and including merging the two
libraries into one and putting it into the tree by default. None of this has
been sorted out and not be a committer [or somebody who knows a heck of a lot
about USB :)] I'll have to stand by the trenches and watch the discussion.

-- 
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
John Reynolds         Chandler Capabilities Engineering, CDS, Intel Corporation
jreynold@sedona.ch.intel.com  My opinions are mine, not Intel's. Running
jjreynold@home.com        FreeBSD 4.2-STABLE. FreeBSD: The Power to Serve.
http://www.reynoldsnet.org/  Come join us!!! @ http://www.FreeBSD.org/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=


To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message




Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?14982.63985.55237.755714>