Re: [ITP] libusb1.0 1.0.5

[Corinna Vinschen <corinna-cygwin at cygwin dot com>]

On Mar  1 00:26, Samuel Thibault wrote:
> It can thus be useful to the cygwin brltty package, I hence ITP it. Here
> is the proposed setup.hint, quite inspired from the libusb-win32
> setup.hint:
> 
> sdesc: "USB programming library"
> ldesc: "USB programming library.
> It is a library that allows userspace application to access USB 
> devices on WinUSB-compatible Windows operation systems (WinXP, Vista, and 7). 
> It is being integrated and fully API compatible to libusb available at 
> http://libusb.sourceforge.net.";
> category: Devel Libs
> 
> I have uploaded an initial packaging on
> 
> http://brl.thefreecat.org/libusb1.0/setup.hint
> http://brl.thefreecat.org/libusb1.0/libusb1.0-1.0.5+git03e9371a-1-src.tar.bz2
> http://brl.thefreecat.org/libusb1.0/libusb1.0-1.0.5+git03e9371a-1.tar.bz2
> http://brl.thefreecat.org/libusb1.0/libusb1.0-devel/setup.hint
> http://brl.thefreecat.org/libusb1.0/libusb1.0-devel/libusb1.0-devel-1.0.5+git03e9371a-1.tar.bz2

Packaging looks good, but I'm a bit puzzled about the naming of a few
files and dirs.  AFAICS from the original thread, Yaakov suggested to
rename the package.  I think the separation by package name makes sense,
and the name of the DLL is fine, either.  But I'm not so sure as far as
the include dir and the import libs are concerned.

The include dir is called /usr/include/libusb-1.0, the import libs are
called /usr/lib/libusb-1.0.*.

That looks like a Cygwin-only naming convention.

How are these dir and files named on Debian?

For obvious reasons, the Cygwin files should allow to build against this
libusb the same way as on Linux.  So, if the include dir is called
usr/include/libusb, so they should on Cygwin.  Analog for the libs.
Especially for the libs, it seems the filenames will clash with the old
libusb.dll.a.

Therefore I think what we need is a new libusb-win32 package, which
consists only of the files necessary to install, run, and deinstall the
package, but not the files to build against it.  Then the new package
can become a drop-in replacement development-wise and nobody
accidentally develops against the old package.

Does that make sense?

Btw., is the libusb-compat-0.1 layer part of this package?  I only read
about it on libusb.org, so, if the question is dumb, I apologize.


Corinna

-- 
Corinna Vinschen                  Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to
Cygwin Project Co-Leader          cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Red Hat