Update Linux PacDrive code (TESTERS NEEDED!!!)

[sukibaby]

Update the Linux PacDrive code so that it doesn't require legacy libusb.

• Rewrite the PacDrive code for libusb-1.0
• Pull libusb-1.0 instead of legacy libusb
• Test the code on a real PacDrive setup <- We are currently stuck on this step. If you have a PacDrive setup and you can test on Linux, please feel free to help!

Once testing on a real PacDrive has been done, I will undo the libusb-1.0 bodge and properly pull it in as a submodule.

[teejusb]

I think the preference is to bundle libusb as part of extern (as a submodule: https://github.com/libusb/libusb) so that we can build it along with the binary and we don't need to require system libs.

[sukibaby]

Should I pull this in? https://github.com/libusb/libusb-cmake

[phantom10111]

I'd like to point out that currently itgmania uses legacy libusb-0.1 so modern libusb from github won't work due to API incompatibility. It might be a good idea to upgrade to new libusb first. Or use API wrapper from here: https://github.com/libusb/libusb-compat-0.1

[sukibaby]

I'd like to point out that currently itgmania uses legacy libusb-0.1 so modern libusb from github won't work due to API incompatibility. It might be a good idea to upgrade to new libusb first. Or use API wrapper from here: https://github.com/libusb/libusb-compat-0.1

I like the idea of using a compatibility layer because it would be good to avoid rewriting any of the PacDrive stuff, especially since I don't have access to any kind of cabinet. I suppose the CMake build could also be modified so that Linux PacDrive support is one of the optional choices.

[geefr]

My note on compat is that's what most (all?) linux distros are installing for 0.1 anyway - Can't remember what the changes were but I did have a 3.95 fork compile against libusb 1.0 perfectly fine, think it was mostly just including the right headers and fixing a couple function calls.

Pulling in as a static lib in extern is probably best, unless there's licencing issues (there's not in this case).

Making things optional I'm not sure on for itgmania - They probably should be in cmake, but having everything available by default is nice, even if it makes the binary slightly larger (perhaps as advanced options, so removing features is possible but discouraged?).

(If you're picking this up though suki, thanks - One I can remove from my whiteboard, Happy to advise on cryptic linux things or test when I've got the time)

[teejusb]

I think in order of preference, it would be:

1. Use libusb 1.0 everywhere and bundle with the binary. This would mean updating the PacDrive code. Testing I think I can send off to Din since he tested it/verified the original PR. I like the idea of standardizing and pulling in updates with submodules is what ITGmania prefers.
2. Use libusb-compat 0.1. It's lower friction, but I think it's a worse long term option because (1) is better imo.
3. Include prebuilt binary like in this original PR. Not preferred.

1 >>>> 2 >>>> 3

[sukibaby]

I'll change the scope of this PR accordingly:

I think in order of preference, it would be:

1. Use libusb 1.0 everywhere and bundle with the binary. This would mean updating the PacDrive code. Testing I think I can send off to Din since he tested it/verified the original PR. I like the idea of standardizing and pulling in updates with submodules is what ITGmania prefers.
2. Use libusb-compat 0.1. It's lower friction, but I think it's a worse long term option because (1) is better imo.
3. Include prebuilt binary like in this original PR. Not preferred.

1 >>>> 2 >>>> 3

[teejusb]

Thank you so much for the work!

[sukibaby]

I'll admit I haven't worked with CMake before starting to contribute to ITGMania, so forgive me for being unfamiliar with it, but it seems like it's reporting that libusb can't be found despite the new version being successfully pulled for the makefile.

I couldn't figure out why it was saying this but it seemed to work so i went ahead on other changes for now.

On both my local machine and the Github Ubuntu build test I'm seeing this in the CMake generated Makefile:
.... /usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libusb-1.0.so ....

and in CMakeCache:

build/CMakeCache.txt:345:LIBUSB_INCLUDE_DIRS:PATH=/usr/include/libusb-1.0
build/CMakeCache.txt:348:LIBUSB_LIBRARIES:FILEPATH=/usr/lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libusb-1.0.so

however cmake -B build reports:

-- Checking for module 'libusb'
--   No package 'libusb' found

[sukibaby]

Here I do not know what I am doing at all:

itgmania/src/arch/Lights/LightsDriver_LinuxPacDrive.cpp

Lines 288 to 290 in b20ac10

	// i don't know where to put this?
	// it shouldn't run every time a device closes
	//libusb_exit(NULL);

Attention there would be appreciated very much.

[sukibaby]

I think the preference is to bundle libusb as part of extern (as a submodule: https://github.com/libusb/libusb) so that we can build it along with the binary and we don't need to require system libs.

Is it okay if I leave this up to you? All I did as far as that goes is was change what version of libusb apt pulls in ci.yml and make an ugly tweak in FindLibusb.cmake so I could get going on the new code.

[jsirex]

I have PacDrive at home. If you manage somehow upgrading libusb I can build your branch and test it.

UPD: I've just realized, that I have linux os, so I can build and test this..

[teejusb]

Is it okay if I leave this up to you? All I did as far as that goes is was change what version of libusb apt pulls in ci.yml and make an ugly tweak in FindLibusb.cmake so I could get going on the new code.

Might take some time for me to get around to so we'll see when this will complete.

[sukibaby]

Is it okay if I leave this up to you? All I did as far as that goes is was change what version of libusb apt pulls in ci.yml and make an ugly tweak in FindLibusb.cmake so I could get going on the new code.

Might take some time for me to get around to so we'll see when this will complete.

Thank you. if it's not done by the time anyone's able to confirm whether the new code works or not, I'll take care of it.

[sukibaby]

I have PacDrive at home. If you manage somehow upgrading libusb I can build your branch and test it.

UPD: I've just realized, that I have linux os, so I can build and test this..

Feel free to ping me (here or elsewhere) if you need a hand with this. Thank you!!

[sukibaby]

I updated the first post of the PR to be a little more helpful.