From: "Andrew de Quincey" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On Friday 26 March 2004 15:14, Peter Urbanec wrote: > > How about adding another layer? Take all this from the driver, but > > provide a library implementation that applications can dynamically link > > to to get the reassembly for free. That way you get the benefit of both > > worlds. You keep the driver simple and the application developer doesn't > > have to reinvent the wheel. > > Yeah, I agree, thats *exactly* the way to do it.
And I thought that's exactly what the Linux-DVB API is all about!? I.e. to provide a framework as well as all the _common_ non-hardware specific code, so that for each individual piece of hardware only a minimum driver, ideally a "Hardware Abstraction Layer" (HAL) is required. The API then provides all the "mid-level" code (e.g. tuning control, satellite equipment control, common interface), and the individual applications then take advantage of high-level APIs and do _not_ have to re-implement everything. But according to Klaus' comments, the API is currently far from that...? Regards, -- Robert Schlabbach e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Berlin, Germany -- Info: To unsubscribe send a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe linux-dvb" as subject.
