[arch-dev-public] move libusb1 to [core]
Hi guys, usbutils need libusb1 to build, it's a core package. Are you fine with moving libusb1 to [core]? greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa@archlinux.org
On 28/11/10 23:02, Tobias Powalowski wrote:
Hi guys, usbutils need libusb1 to build, it's a core package. Are you fine with moving libusb1 to [core]?
Shouldn't we be changing libusb to the 1.x series as the 0.x series is dead upstream. If anything actually still needs libusb-0 then we need to build the libusb-compat wrapper (http://www.libusb.org/wiki/libusb-compat-0.1). I can remember this being brought up a year or so ago but it appears nothing ever got done about it... Allan
Am Sonntag 28 November 2010 schrieb Allan McRae:
On 28/11/10 23:02, Tobias Powalowski wrote:
Hi guys, usbutils need libusb1 to build, it's a core package. Are you fine with moving libusb1 to [core]?
Shouldn't we be changing libusb to the 1.x series as the 0.x series is dead upstream. If anything actually still needs libusb-0 then we need to build the libusb-compat wrapper (http://www.libusb.org/wiki/libusb-compat-0.1).
I can remember this being brought up a year or so ago but it appears nothing ever got done about it...
Allan Udev still builds against old libusb.
-- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa@archlinux.org
On 28/11/10 23:31, Tobias Powalowski wrote:
Am Sonntag 28 November 2010 schrieb Allan McRae:
On 28/11/10 23:02, Tobias Powalowski wrote:
Hi guys, usbutils need libusb1 to build, it's a core package. Are you fine with moving libusb1 to [core]?
Shouldn't we be changing libusb to the 1.x series as the 0.x series is dead upstream. If anything actually still needs libusb-0 then we need to build the libusb-compat wrapper (http://www.libusb.org/wiki/libusb-compat-0.1).
I can remember this being brought up a year or so ago but it appears nothing ever got done about it...
Udev still builds against old libusb.
OK, so we definitely need libusb-compat... I'd much prefer to see libusb upgraded to 1.x and libusb-compat added to [core] rather than just bringing libusb1 to [core]. My guess is that the needed rebuild would be small and I can generate a list if this is seen by others as the way to go. Allan
Am Sonntag 28 November 2010 schrieb Allan McRae:
On 28/11/10 23:31, Tobias Powalowski wrote:
Am Sonntag 28 November 2010 schrieb Allan McRae:
On 28/11/10 23:02, Tobias Powalowski wrote:
Hi guys, usbutils need libusb1 to build, it's a core package. Are you fine with moving libusb1 to [core]?
Shouldn't we be changing libusb to the 1.x series as the 0.x series is dead upstream. If anything actually still needs libusb-0 then we need to build the libusb-compat wrapper (http://www.libusb.org/wiki/libusb-compat-0.1).
I can remember this being brought up a year or so ago but it appears nothing ever got done about it...
Udev still builds against old libusb.
OK, so we definitely need libusb-compat...
I'd much prefer to see libusb upgraded to 1.x and libusb-compat added to [core] rather than just bringing libusb1 to [core]. My guess is that the needed rebuild would be small and I can generate a list if this is seen by others as the way to go.
Allan Yes I agree with you, we should replace libusb with libusb 1.x and add libusb- compat.
any other opinions? greetings tpowa -- Tobias Powalowski Archlinux Developer & Package Maintainer (tpowa) http://www.archlinux.org tpowa@archlinux.org
On 28/11/10 23:32, Allan McRae wrote:
On 28/11/10 23:02, Tobias Powalowski wrote:
Hi guys, usbutils need libusb1 to build, it's a core package. Are you fine with moving libusb1 to [core]?
Shouldn't we be changing libusb to the 1.x series as the 0.x series is dead upstream. If anything actually still needs libusb-0 then we need to build the libusb-compat wrapper (http://www.libusb.org/wiki/libusb-compat-0.1).
I can remember this being brought up a year or so ago but it appears nothing ever got done about it...
Not quite a year ago: http://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-dev-public/2010-February/015629....
participants (2)
-
Allan McRae
-
Tobias Powalowski