[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/proaudio Archives
]
- To: proaudio@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [proaudio] libusbx
- From: Reuben Martin <reuben.m@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2012 09:39:34 -0500
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:user-agent:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:content-transfer-encoding:content-type; bh=M6WQi3SqU/yxGwxcC6p652KoIfXYFp4EzAd8nLVdYxI=; b=ob0yZ+9WPdChwMQIoFLlOyd6MUdSIr4FURCy6E54JrfYw3iN1qZhCWpv4fVo10H/M7 EfJVQoOA3Dle3OxHh7rRKHky1pbg6JacQrnwhMrUemH3mp63E/I1jvHHi7qo7AsRmvLg jwFtEOVZC70+DM01Tm/HpG9Ncna8hWwbAarQpE/P0bwjOHGSzhWFi8MEUhoqGV/UZiRm Dk9Y6MjhouXw3yZd4En7SIrTQNNgqA80VntBZjhnR9SdmUq5zmhqdycX2TLQSmv4me13 K6B2PbnK1DeWsqBgikzM6mIhQWarw4hG6JP5m1AApohX2n784FO8OloO2WrsrJh7DRKR HaFA==
If libusb will continue to be available, yes. I was under the impression
though that libusb was eventually getting the boot.
-Reuben
On Monday, September 03, 2012 09:41:58 AM Jannis Achstetter wrote:
> Am 03.09.2012 04:43, schrieb Reuben Martin:
> > Please update ebuilds to require libusbx instead of libusb.
> > [...]
>
> Wouldn't it be better (and even more correct) to depend on
> virtual/libusb? Then the user can decide which libusb he installs to
> the system?
>
> Best regards