> No, please; this is really discouraging, like the diseqc mess; > I wonder why in the kernel there isn't a diseqc implementation, at least > for 1.0 devices and a > simple 2/1 or 4/1 configuration. Currently all players have to implement > it in userspace, and IMHO > this really sucks. Any plan to add such a library in the kernel and the > corresponding item (lnb) > in the qpsk structure? It would really be a great improvement: no more > buggy diseqc code in > every application !
Adding the DISEQC to the kernel would be bloat. It has to be in userspace to provide the maximum flexibility for all the possible combinations of diseqc devices out there. A better solution would be to implement a good standard userspace library for DISEQC that all the apps use. The stuff that VDR has looks extremely sophisticated; why not pull that out into a seperate library, and patch everything else to use it? The same goes for the CI code. The other 3 or 4 layers of the EN50221 CAM control interface are already implemented in userspace, and therefore will suffer from all the possibilities of bugs you describe; why should the link layer reassembly code be in the kernel as well? And the reassembly code is the EASIEST bit of the protocol, believe me. -- Info: To unsubscribe send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe linux-dvb" as subject.
