From: Vojtech P. <vo...@su...> - 2003-08-11 19:06:20
|
On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 07:56:42PM +0200, Johannes Stezenbach wrote: > Gerd Knorr wrote: > > > > > We can drop /dev/lirc*, and use input events with received codes, but I > > > think that lircd is still needed to translate them into userland > > > commands... > > > > That translation isn't done by lircd, but by the lirc_client library. > > This is no reason for keeping lircd as event dispatcher, the input layer > > would do equally well (with liblirc_client picking up events from > > /dev/input/event<x> instead of lircd). > > IMHO there's one problem: > > If a remote control has e.g. a "1" key this doesn't mean that a user > wants a "1" to be written into your editor while editing source code. > The "1" key on a remote control simply has a differnt _meaning_ than > the "1" key on your keyboard -- depending of course on what the user > thinks this key should mean. That's what BTN_1 is for. ;) > - users should be able to prevent remote keys from being fed into > the normal keyboard input queue; non lirc aware programs should > not recieve these events > (OTOH, if you use an IR keyboard...) Yes, the console needs to be configurable in that respect. Its something that needs to be fixed. > - IR events should reach the applications independant of X keyboard > focus (well, maybe; the user should be able to decide) > > With the current input subsystem, the only possiblity is lircd > grabbing the remote events with EVIOCGRAB, and passing them > on to the applications. -- Vojtech Pavlik SuSE Labs, SuSE CR |