Quoting Fenix (fenix...@gmail.com):
>
> Hi.
>
> I attach the previous patch cleaned of unfunctional cosmetic changes.
>
> As I said in my previous message, I maintain the complex anidation of
> the original conditional structure. It is ugly, but it works. Anyway, if you
> think it should be refactor, we can make it a bit more readable.
>
> So, I'm keeping from previuos patch (libusb1.0_fix.patch):
>
> 1) The elimination of a duplicate mark of block {} in the main for (this
> is cosmetic but is really ugly keep it. :))
>
> 2) The changes for the else block in the conditional blocks (Functional
> change).
>
> 3) The changes that pass the new (for libusb1.0) endpoints directions of
> the device (functional change). In this, I change too the printed messages
> for a better understanding for verbose purpose (cosmetic but I think it's
> neccesary for good verbosity).
>
>
>
> If you have any question or suggestion, please, feel free to ask.
>
> As I said in my last message, could be a good idea that the original
> patcher of the port to libusb1.0 checks this patch. I suppose he is
> experience with libusb, and I could overlook something related with.I just uploaded -10 yesterday. Please let me know if it works OK now.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
