Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752961AbZK1SSP (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Nov 2009 13:18:15 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752378AbZK1SSP (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Nov 2009 13:18:15 -0500 Received: from einhorn.in-berlin.de ([192.109.42.8]:47981 "EHLO einhorn.in-berlin.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751852AbZK1SSO (ORCPT ); Sat, 28 Nov 2009 13:18:14 -0500 X-Envelope-From: stefanr@s5r6.in-berlin.de Message-ID: <4B116954.5050706@s5r6.in-berlin.de> Date: Sat, 28 Nov 2009 19:17:56 +0100 From: Stefan Richter User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.8.1.23) Gecko/20091025 SeaMonkey/1.1.18 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jon Smirl CC: Christoph Bartelmus , khc@pm.waw.pl, awalls@radix.net, dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, j@jannau.net, jarod@redhat.com, jarod@wilsonet.com, linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-media@vger.kernel.org, maximlevitsky@gmail.com, mchehab@redhat.com, superm1@ubuntu.com Subject: Re: [RFC] What are the goals for the architecture of an in-kernel IR system? References: <9e4733910911280906if1191a1jd3d055e8b781e45c@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <9e4733910911280906if1191a1jd3d055e8b781e45c@mail.gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1166 Lines: 26 Jon Smirl wrote: > There are two very basic things that we need to reach consensus on first. > > 1) Unification with mouse/keyboard in evdev - put IR on equal footing. > 2) Specific tools (xmodmap, setkeycodes, etc or the LIRC ones) or > generic tools (ls, mkdir, echo) for configuration About 2: If at all, there only needs to be a decision about pulse/space to scancode converter configuration. In contrast, scancode to keycode converter configuration is already solved; the interface is EVIOCSKEYCODE. If you find the EVIOCSKEYCODE interface lacking, extend it or submit an alternative --- but this does not affect LIRC and whether to merge it in any way. PS: Drop your "specific vs. generic tools" terminology already. Your configfs based proposal requires "specific" tools as well, it's just that they can be implemented in bash, among else. -- Stefan Richter -=====-==--= =-== ===-- http://arcgraph.de/sr/ -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/