Xiaofan Chen wrote: > > The libusb-1.0 dir in CFLAGS is a workaround for a bug in how libftdi > > uses libusb-1.0. libftdi should do #include <libusb-1.0/libusb.h> but > > does #include <libusb.h> which is wrong. This forces all libftdi > > users to mess with include paths, to add the directory that libftdi > > happened to be built with, and this is clearly *not* how things are > > supposed to work. libftdi should be fixed. > > This may not be quite true. libftdi-1.0 will try to get libusb-1.0 CFLAGS > from pkg-config data (libusb-1.0.pc). libftdi (0.1) will try to get > libusb CFLAGS from pkg-config data (libusb.pc) or libusb-config. > I think it should work fine.
Thanks! You're absolutely right about pkg-config. It's a little annoying for very simple apps, and it might be troublesome on Windows.. Hmm, I'll bring it up on libusb-devel. libftdi.pc doesn't have Requires: libusb-1.0 so that should be fixed. I guess it's work in progress still, but these build things should be fixed sooner rather than later. > > The two seds are neccessary since OpenOCD assumes that libftdi is > > built against libusb-0.1. I'm not sure about the best fix for the > > configure.in test, pkg-config is obviously the answer for the configure test. > > but for build time libtool will always do the > > right thing if -lusb is simply removed from src/Makefile.am. > > What if I need both libusb-1.0 (for libftdi-1.0) and > libusb-0.1 (say for J-Link)? Yeah, I thought about this. It would be ideal for OpenOCD (and all it's dependencies) to only use libusb-0.1 or libusb-1.0 for everything, but it's possible to mix both APIs by using libusb-compat-0.1 which provides the libusb-0.1 API on top of libusb-1.0. That's the only way to not have to rewrite all the drivers at once. Building with both libusb-1.0 and libusb-0.1 at the same time is not a good idea, they will conflict with each other. > Probably it is the time for OpenOCD to start to offer the options > for libusb-1.0 and libftdi-1.0 and may migrate the libusb-0.1 based > files to libusb-1.0. Yes, I agree it's the best way, but someone has to do it. :) //Peter _______________________________________________ Openocd-development mailing list Openocd-development@lists.berlios.de https://lists.berlios.de/mailman/listinfo/openocd-development
