[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Bug#310365: libusb timeout, patch



On Sun, May 29, 2005 at 05:24:50PM +0200, Aurelien Jarno wrote:
> On Tue, May 24, 2005 at 12:40:33PM +0200, Julien BLACHE wrote:
> > Aurelien Jarno <aurelien@aurel32.net> wrote:

> > > I would prefer I change in SANE instead of libusb, so that other
> > > applications using libusb won't suffer to performance losses.

> > I strongly disagree. I know what I'm losing with libsane as it is
> > today, I don't know what I'm going to lose with this hackish patch.

> Ok, so let's go with a modified version of libusb.

> For the release managers, I have uploaded a fixed version of libusb to
> testing-proposed-updates. Here are the changes:

> diff -u libusb-0.1.10a/linux.c libusb-0.1.10a/linux.c
> --- libusb-0.1.10a/linux.c
> +++ libusb-0.1.10a/linux.c
> @@ -132,7 +132,7 @@
>   * Linux usbfs has a limit of 16KB for the URB interface. We use this now
>   * to get better performance for USB 2.0 devices.
>   */
> -#define MAX_READ_WRITE	(16 * 1024)
> +#define MAX_READ_WRITE	(4 * 1024)
>  
>  int usb_control_msg(usb_dev_handle *dev, int requesttype, int request,
>  	int value, int index, char *bytes, int size, int timeout)

Approved, subject to per-architecture builds.

But I don't see any reason why this should have been uploaded to t-p-u
instead of to unstable; I don't see any changes in unstable that were
inappropriate for sarge:

--- libusb-0.1.10a/debian/changelog
+++ libusb-0.1.10a/debian/changelog
@@ -1,3 +1,23 @@
+libusb (2:0.1.10a-12) unstable; urgency=low
+
+  * Changed hotplug recommendation to a suggestion (closes: bug#310909).
+
+ -- Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org>  Sun, 29 May 2005 16:37:57 +0200

This change doesn't seem to actually be there;

+libusb (2:0.1.10a-11) unstable; urgency=low
+
+  * Updated German debconf translation. Thanks to Rene van Bevern (closes:
+    bug#310419).
+
+ -- Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org>  Mon, 23 May 2005 19:23:07 +0200

translations are explicitly allowed by the freeze policy;

+libusb (2:0.1.10a-10) unstable; urgency=low
+
+  * No changes. New version needed to be able to upload to 
+    testing-proposed-updates. 
+
+ -- Aurelien Jarno <aurel32@debian.org>  Mon, 23 May 2005 01:43:16 +0200

Completely unnecessary upload. :/

So now testing doesn't have the translation fix, and unstable doesn't have
the performance fix...

-- 
Steve Langasek
postmodern programmer

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature


Reply to: