lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2009]   [Nov]   [30]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    SubjectRe: [RFC] What are the goals for the architecture of an in-kernel IR system?
    From
    On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 06:26:55PM -0500, Andy Walls wrote:
    > The only thing this buys for the user is remote/products bundles that
    > work out of the box. That can only be a solution for the 80% case.
    >
    > I don't hear users crying out "Please integrate IR with the input
    > system". I do hear users say "I want my remote to work", and "How can I
    > make my remote work?". Users are not specifically asking for this
    > integration of IR and the input system - a technical nuance. If such a
    > tecnical desire-ment drives excessive rework, I doubt anyone will care
    > enough about IR to follow through to make a complete system.

    Please integrate it so I can stop having issues with the lirc moduels
    when going to a new kernel version.

    > What does "equal footing" mean as an incentive anyway? The opportunity
    > to reimplement *everything* that exists for IR already over again in
    > kernel-space for the sake of developer technical desires? That's just a
    > lot of work for "not invented here" syndrome. IR transceivers are
    > arguably superior to keyboards and mice anyway because they can transmit
    > data too.

    I have no idea. I am sure you guys will come up with a great interface.
    I just use lirc with my mythtv box.

    --
    Len Sorensen


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2009-11-30 18:45    [W:2.525 / U:0.236 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site