Hi, > -----Original Message----- > From: 'Matt Porter' [mailto:matt.porter@xxxxxxxxxx] > Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2013 6:59 PM > To: Krzysztof Opasiak > Cc: balbi@xxxxxx; linux-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Subject: Re: Gadget tool proposition > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2013 at 01:35:45PM +0100, Krzysztof Opasiak wrote: > > Hi, > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Felipe Balbi [mailto:balbi@xxxxxx] > > > Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2013 6:33 PM > > > To: Krzysztof Opasiak > > > Cc: linux-usb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx; Matt Porter > > > Subject: Re: Gadget tool proposition > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 03:28:43PM +0100, Krzysztof Opasiak > wrote: > > > > With all ConfigFS benefits, flexibility and other advantages, > > > it's 5 > > > > or maybe 10 times more writing than in the old solution to > > > fulfill the > > > > most common use cases. Users are lazy, they will still use > the > > > old, > > > > bad solution, unless we will develop some user-space tool for > > > > convenient gadget management. > > > > > > there's already libgadget [1] which Matt Porter has been > working > > > on, how about you help him out ? I'd really like to see > libgadget > > > bindings for ruby, for example. As well as some default > examples > > > for current, in-tree gadget drivers. > > > > As I wrote in previous message. I would like to use libgadget. > There are > > some issues, but I will prepare some patches which implements the > > missing things, I that Matt will accept them. > > > > More over I'm not sure if there is a need to have two projects - > gt and > > libgadget. Maybe create only one and only in distributions > provide > > separate packages for tool and library. What do you think Matt? > > Yes, I'd like that. I very much want patches to support this. My > intention has been to support a tool like the gt you describe > below. > I've got some wip changes to rename libgadget->libusbg to avoid > some > older libgadget projects that are not maintained but provide > confusion. > I also have some other apis mostly finished that I previously > mentioned > for removal and other support functions. Great, I'm looking forward for the upgrade. > > Let's plan on having gt being part of the same repo..packagers can > split > the library and tool out as they need. > > I was traveling last week and didn't get these updates cleaned up > and > pushed but it should happen next week for 0.0.2. > What about repo which I have created at github? Maybe we can use it for both gadget tool and libusbg? The next version of this library could be introduced there? -- BR's Krzysiek -- 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
