Re: [RFC] What are the goals for the architecture of an in-kernel IR system?

Lennart Sorensen
2009-11-30T17:43:13Z

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