Consider using nusb instead of rusb

[ia0]

This is needed to make the CLI portable, e.g. to provide a version for Windows.

This may also remove problems with required system dependencies.

Reference: https://crates.io/crates/nusb

[wendulem]

@ia0 I'm a bit unsure what you're referencing with 'required system dependencies' here. Do you just mean libusb via rusb or that this specific dependency change (from rusb to nusb) solves some endemic issue with system dependencies?

Also when you reference this issue in #77 do you mean 'getting rid' of global dependencies like libusb while still maintaining the ~ same number of top level dependencies? As in, that is the strategy you have in mind?

[ia0]

Do you just mean libusb via rusb

Yes, I mean getting rid of the libusb dependency.

do you mean 'getting rid' of global dependencies like libusb while still maintaining the ~ same number of top level dependencies?

Yes, although I don't mind changing the number of direct dependencies, nor the number of transitive dependencies. I prefer something reproducible/hermetic with many dependencies than the opposite.

I'm curious, why do you ask?

[wendulem]

I was looking to make a PR to resolve the issue - but I was also unsure if you were proposing several refactorings of this sort as a primary method of enhancing build reproducibility, as was seemingly suggested in #77

[ia0]

A PR would be welcome. I don't know yet what's best for reproducibility, this might not suffice or help that much. So this issue can also be seen as an experiment to figure out if this helps.