Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

[bladeRF-cli] probe can't access already opened devices (libusb, Windows) #464

Closed
jynik opened this issue Mar 10, 2016 · 1 comment
Closed

[bladeRF-cli] probe can't access already opened devices (libusb, Windows) #464

jynik opened this issue Mar 10, 2016 · 1 comment
Labels
Component: Host General host software issues Issue: Bug It's a bug and it oughta be fixed Platform: Windows Build/usage issues on Windows

Comments

@jynik
Copy link
Contributor

jynik commented Mar 10, 2016

In Linux, probe will show info for devices that are already in use.

In Windows, libusb appears to return an error in this situation and we report an "insufficient permissions" issue.

More investigation into this is required...
@jynik jynik added the Issue: Bug It's a bug and it oughta be fixed label Mar 10, 2016
@jynik jynik self-assigned this Mar 10, 2016
@jynik jynik changed the title [bladeRF-cli] probe can't access already opened devices (libusb) [bladeRF-cli] probe can't access already opened devices (libusb, Windows) Jun 29, 2016
@rtucker rtucker added Component: Host General host software issues Platform: Windows Build/usage issues on Windows labels Aug 2, 2017
@rtucker
Copy link
Contributor

rtucker commented Aug 4, 2017

cannot reproduce in master, probe works just fine with opened devices

@rtucker rtucker closed this as completed Aug 4, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Component: Host General host software issues Issue: Bug It's a bug and it oughta be fixed Platform: Windows Build/usage issues on Windows
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@rtucker @jynik