On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 3:35 AM, Uwe Bonnes
<bon@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>>>>> "Joerg" == Joerg Wunsch <libftdi@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Joerg> It's puzzling. First, libftdi uses the old libusb-0.1 interface
libftdi-1.0 uses libusb-1.0.
> The new libusb-1 interface has it's drawbacks on windows. The relative easy
> (argh) instructions how to set up libusb-0.1 on windows explode for using
> libusb-1 , also Xiaofan did much work and has gave many hints.
The issue is the slow integration of libusb-1.0 Windows backend. If
the project maintainers were doing a better job, 1.0.9 would have
been released last year with WinUSB backend, and then libusb0.sys
backend would have been integrated and many nice features would
have ben on the pipeline. But now all is in the air...
It is also possible to test both libftdi-0.19git and libftdi-1.0git at the
same time under Windows, but due to the use of winusb driver, you
lose the FTD2XX side.
http://developer.intra2net.com/mailarchive/html/libftdi/2011/msg00461.html
> I also stay with libftdi-0 for my xc3sprog project for that reason.
I think that is probably a good decision right now until libusb-1.0's
1.0.9 release.
> However most patches are for libftdi-1. bad situation.
If really desired, you can port the changes back to libftdi-0.19git. Actually
you can even implement async I/O for libftdi-0.19git under Windows
with libusb-win32 async APIs.
http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/libusb-win32/wiki/libusbwin32_documentation
> B.t.w.: How common are Full-Speed hubs. Is debugging worth the effort?
> And do you really bitbang? Why not MPSSE?
I do not think it is that common now. It is good to be used a debugging
tool. So I think this is not a high priority fix.
--
Xiaofan
--
libftdi - see http://www.intra2net.com/en/developer/libftdi for details.
To unsubscribe send a mail to libftdi+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
|
