On Wed, Jun 30, 2010 at 9:06 PM, Jiri Kosina <jkosina@xxxxxxx> wrote: >> Sorry I do not know much about hidraw. However, if HIDraw is so >> "raw", what are the benefits of HIDRAW compared to using libusb? > > It's independent on transport below HID protocol. I.e. it works for > Bluetooth HID devices as well (and any potential HID devices over > different transport protocol that might come in the future). Thanks. This makes sense. >> Then there is also libhid which is on top of libusb. > > Which is basically comparable to hiddev -- i.e. USB only, and performs > report processing and parsing. > Some of us in the libusb mailing list have this desire to create a real cross-platform HID API (which libhid is trying to do but without real success -- at least under Windows since there is no real Windows port) on top of libusb-1.0. The new libusb-1.0 Windows backend can directly use the native HID API. And I create a ticket to ask for a native HID backend for Mac OS X and I believe it can be done. http://www.libusb.org/ticket/33 I am not so sure if it is necessary to create a native hidraw backend for Linux or not. But the advantage of transport-independent HID device seems to be a good one. I think Windows native HID API also support non-USB device. Not so sure about Mac OS X though since I do not use Mac and do not know Mac. -- Xiaofan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-usb" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
