Am Thu, 8 Jan 2009 18:15:50 -0600 (CST) schrieb Mike Isely <[email protected]>:
> On Thu, 8 Jan 2009, Michael Krufky wrote: > > > On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 6:27 PM, Carsten Meier <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > I've used lirc before and decided to better not use it again after > > > setting up a new system... Could somebody please port the > > > corresponding lirc-stuff to v4l? ;) OK, then I have no choice and > > > use it again... Thanks to all. > > > > That's not going to happen. > > > > It's much more likely that the "v4l" IR devices will be removed in > > favor of LIRC, now that LIRC has been merged into the kernel and is > > being refactored to work much more closely with the input subsystem. > > > > LIRC is the way to go, otherwise, -EOUTOFLUCK. > > Actually, if it's going to finally play nice with the input > subsystem, that would probably address the primary issue why Carsten > steered away from LIRC in the first place. > > I should search the kernel to see if there is an -EOUTOFLUCK. If > not, somebody should post a patch to add it :-) > > My big complaint about LIRC is that it is a major PITA to compile its > out-of-tree kernel modules. I'm always fighting with its brain-dead > build system. To finally have that in the kernel - with that cruft > gone > - is great. > > -Mike > > If lirc delivers remote-events through the input subsystem I've no problem with it. :) Is there already a way to do this? BTW: Someone should suggest EOUTOFLUCK for inclusion into posix :D _______________________________________________ pvrusb2 mailing list [email protected] http://www.isely.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pvrusb2
