CFT: Re: linux libusb again, I made an updated port...

[Bjoern A. Zeeb]

On 09 Feb 2014, at 13:59 , Juergen Lock <nox at 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 My stuff may be out of date, but it was all tested and working.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                             ????????? ??? ??????? ??????:
'??? ??? ???? ??????  ??????? ?? ?? ??????? ??????? ??? ????? ????? ????
?????? ?? ????? ????',  ????????? ?????????, "??? ????? ?? ?????", ?.???