On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 12:48 PM, Michael Dickens <[email protected]> wrote:
> IMHO it would be unwise for any current GR component to be dependent on > "tuntaposx", since it's a non-standard addition to the OS (a kernel > extension, not just a library with headers and related files). Got it, it's what I figured. > If this were made into its own component (e.g., "gr-tuntap"), then I'd be > all for it. On Darwin, it would require tuntaposx to be installed, which > shouldn't be difficult to check for. On other platforms, checking might be > easier, but all of this would be done during configure via the config/*.m4 > scripts anyway. Agree. A short-term version would be a cross-platform object you could instantiate with an interface name to create and you'd get two gr.msg_queue's, one each for rx and tx packet data. It really calls for either an mblock (which exists), or the message passing extension to gr-blocks that we've been tossing around. > My US$.01 (during current economic crisis). - MLD The joys of fiat currency :) -Johnathan _______________________________________________ Discuss-gnuradio mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio
