Re: libusb+librump patch

[Antti Kantee]

On 15/10/15 01:13, Bruno Félix Rezende Ribeiro wrote:
> > If you do need libusb, adding a ugen component shouldn't be too
> > difficult, though.
>
> How could I help with that?  Is it worth?

I don't know if it's worth it because I don't know what you want to do! ;)

It's probably enough to create a component in sys/rump/dev/lib which 
builds sys/dev/ugen.c.  See some of the other usb related components 
under sys/rump/dev/lib for inspiration and Makefile-copypaste-fodder.

> > (but I sort of hate ugen ;)
>
> I want to give USB support to Hurd.  I know it sounds generic, but any
> working initial implementation will do as a starting point.  Do you have
> any alternative suggestions?

Yes, ugen sounds generic ;)

> > What sort of general architecture are you planning in the Hurd case?
>
> Sorry, I don't understand the question.

Well, you seem to want the USB drivers, which a rump kernel will give 
you, but you also seem to want raw access to the USB devices, which 
ugen, which runs on top of the "device independent" USB stack will give 
you.  You can drive one device only from one driver.  So do you want to 
implement your own drivers on top of libusb and use the rump kernel only 
for the host controller and device-independent USB support, or do you 
want to actually use the USB device-level drivers too (mass storage, 
etc)?  Or both, depending on the device?  Or something completely 
different?  I don't know what the Hurd mindset is!