Re: USB keyboard driver the GNU Mach

Hi Rowland :) Quoting Rowland Smith (2016-02-29 01:47:08) > This does not seem like the right forum for this post, but this list looks > like the only hurd list with any activity, so here goes. This is the perfect place for this. Welcome :) > I have taken on the project this year of getting the

Re: USB Mass Storage with rump

El 24/09/15 a les 00:05, Olaf Buddenhagen ha escrit: Instead, you could run a Rump instance with USB mass storage only which uses libusb as backend rather than its own *HCI driver (but that requires some coding work as it's currently not implemented ;-)) Yeah, I guess that's the price to pay if

Re: USB Mass Storage with rump

Olaf Buddenhagen, le Thu 24 Sep 2015 00:11:26 +0200, a écrit : > On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 10:59:39AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > > > It'd probably be easy to make ext2fs open a device node, just like we > > made pfinet do it. > > As I already mentioned on IRC, I don't think we should emulate M

Re: USB Mass Storage with rump

Hi, On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 10:59:39AM +0200, Samuel Thibault wrote: > It'd probably be easy to make ext2fs open a device node, just like we > made pfinet do it. As I already mentioned on IRC, I don't think we should emulate Mach device nodes at all here. Rather, the USB mass storage server(s) w

Re: USB Mass Storage with rump

Hi, On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 10:52:13AM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > Since you most likely want to provide multiplexing, authorisation, > etc, to any application who wants to access USB, I wouldn't recommend > to lump USB mass storage and *HCI in the same Rump instance. Quite frankly, I wouldn't

Re: USB Mass Storage with rump

Hi, On Sat, Sep 19, 2015 at 11:57:03PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: > single Rump instance inside a single translator which exposes all of > /dev in Rump namespace somewhere under host /dev hierarchy (e.g. > /dev/rump/*). This is certainly tempting, but also dangerous -- once a somewhat working s

Re: USB Mass Storage with rump

El 19/09/15 a les 10:59, Samuel Thibault ha escrit: Instead, you could run a Rump instance with USB mass storage only which uses libusb as backend rather than its own *HCI driver (but that requires some coding work as it's currently not implemented ;-)) Indeed. We can however start with an all-

Re: USB Mass Storage with rump

Robert Millan, le Sat 19 Sep 2015 10:52:13 +0200, a écrit : > If you load *HCI support and USB mass storage into Rump, you can have > /dev/XXX pop up in the Rump namespace and that will be your disk node. > Then you can write a translator to link the host system into that disk > (or whatever way th

Re: USB Mass Storage with rump (was: Full-time developer available)

Olaf Buddenhagen, le Sat 19 Sep 2015 00:52:08 +0200, a écrit : > This looks nice for generic USB. I doubt we have a mass storage driver > using libusb though? Rather, I guess it's something rump implements > internally, and would be exposed through a different entry point? I'd say so, yes. Samuel

Re: USB Mass Storage with rump

El 19/09/15 a les 00:52, Olaf Buddenhagen ha escrit: On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 10:57:20PM +0200, Robert Millan wrote: El 16/09/15 a les 05:47, Bruno Félix Rezende Ribeiro ha escrit: I'm interested in USB support. I'd like to aim mass storage devices at first. For USB using Rump, I think most

Re: USB -- GPLv3 compatibility

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > If you port a driver you should take into account the license such > > driver use. IMHO the Hurd should go towards full GPLv3 compatibility. > > Currently the drivers live in GNU Mach, which is a dependency of the > actual Hurd, but otherwise they are quite disconnecte

Re: USB -- GPLv3 compatibility

Hi, On Mon, Dec 01, 2008 at 12:41:08AM +0100, Davi Leal wrote: > If you port a driver you should take into account the license such > driver use. IMHO the Hurd should go towards full GPLv3 compatibility. Currently the drivers live in GNU Mach, which is a dependency of the actual Hurd, but other

Re: USB -- GPLv3 compatibility

Thomas Schwinge wrote: > One thing to work on are device drivers. These would most probably be > ported from another operating system (Linux, *BSD) If you port a driver you should take into account the license such driver use. IMHO the Hurd should go towards full GPLv3 compatibility. The GPLv3

Re: USB

Hello! Where did you get the idea from to send your message to the hurd-devel-readers mailing list? is the correct list for such questions, as explained on , for example. On Thu, Nov 27, 2008 at 10:28:26PM +0530, മഹേഷ് മുകുന്ദന് | Mahesh M w