Re: drop lircd!

[Gerd K. <kr...@by...>]

On Mon, Aug 11, 2003 at 03:10:36PM +0200, Leonid Froenchenko wrote:
> There's only one critical difference between current implementation and 
> proposed /dev/input:
> current design uses /dev/lirc and proposed uses /dev/input/event<x>.
> Others are just derivatives
> because :
> 1. You still using lircd for serial, usb or others signal decoding 
> (where "drop lircd" comes from ???)

Wrong.  That is _one_ way to handle it.  Another is -- as noted in the
mail -- send the userspace-decoded IR events back to the kernel's input
layer, let the input layer do the event dispatching and to split the
"does everything" lircd monster into smaller parts (one for decoding,
one for networking, ...).

Can you please read the mail _completely_ before replying?

> 2. You still need to compile and load kernel module

The kernel modules can live in the standard kernel through, which will
IMHO make life much easier for both maintainers and users.  And it isn't
needed to split drivers into multiple parts just because one of the
required subsystems (of v4l + lirc) doesn't live in the standard kernel.

> Putting events from remote to keyboard queue will not work.

Read my mail again please.

  Gerd