Hide Forgot
Debian has applied the following patch to libusb-0.1.11: --- libusb-0.1.11.orig/linux.c +++ libusb-0.1.11/linux.c @@ -633,14 +633,11 @@ } if (!usb_path[0]) { - if (check_usb_vfs("/proc/bus/usb")) { - strncpy(usb_path, "/proc/bus/usb", sizeof(usb_path) - 1); - usb_path[sizeof(usb_path) - 1] = 0; - } else if (check_usb_vfs("/sys/bus/usb")) { /* 2.6 Kernel with sysfs */ - strncpy(usb_path, "/sys/bus/usb", sizeof(usb_path) -1); + if (check_usb_vfs("/dev/bus/usb")) { + strncpy(usb_path, "/dev/bus/usb", sizeof(usb_path) - 1); usb_path[sizeof(usb_path) - 1] = 0; - } else if (check_usb_vfs("/dev/usb")) { - strncpy(usb_path, "/dev/usb", sizeof(usb_path) - 1); + } else if (check_usb_vfs("/proc/bus/usb")) { + strncpy(usb_path, "/proc/bus/usb", sizeof(usb_path) - 1); usb_path[sizeof(usb_path) - 1] = 0; } else usb_path[0] = 0; /* No path, no USB support */ This has been done so that devices in /dev/bus/usb be tried first, then /proc/bus/usb, and never try /sys/bus/usb. Can this be applied to Fedoras libusb also? (Or is it already?) It is in line with the rest of our architectural choices.
Notice: udev was altered to provide the devices in /dev/bus/usb, not in /dev/usb as libusb expects, so this is also a consistency issue.
Looks good to me. I'm looking at the upstream discussion you contributed, so if there's no fatal objection to it, I'll apply it today.
The patch has been applied to upstream CVS and will be in libusb 0.1.12, so it's quite safe I guess.
Applied since libusb-0.1.11-2. Thanks!