Linux patches for 1.0.9 release

[Ludovic Rousseau]

Le 27 mars 2012 10:01, Hans de Goede <hdegoede at redhat.com> a écrit :
> On 03/26/2012 11:28 PM, Pete Batard wrote:
>> Finally, am I the only one unhappy with lsusb having (unilaterally?) been
>> renamed to listdevs? If we are worried about name collision, which I don't
>> exactly remember people complaining about, and since a few of us use that
>> sample regularly, I think maybe a shorter name such as lsdevs or even lsu
>> may be better. Anybody would also like to see the litsdevs name either
>> reverted or changed to something else?
>
>
> I agree that listdevs is not a good name, but lsusb indeed is a name
> conflict with a
> very well known tool on Linux. So lets try to come up with something new,
> how about for example: libusb_listdevs ? Or libusb_lsusb The reason I'm
> putting libusb
> in the name is to:
> 1) avoid further namespace conflicts
> 2) because I think it makes sense to make clear in the name that this is a
> libusb
> utility program

I do not understand the problem with listdevs.
- the program is in the examples/ directory and is NOT supposed to be
installed on the system. I was very confused by the previous name
lsusb that was also a famous Unix command.
- using modern shells with filename completion it is very easy to use
a "long" file name.

I object the change to libusb_*. The program will NOT be installed. It
is in noinst_PROGRAMS in Makefile.am
The name listdevs is fine for me.

Bye,

-- 
 Dr. Ludovic Rousseau