On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 16:07 -0400, m. allan noah wrote: > On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 4:00 PM, Louis Lagendijk > <louis at lagendijk.xs4all.nl> wrote: > > On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 15:42 -0400, m. allan noah wrote: > >> On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 3:32 PM, Louis Lagendijk > >> <louis at lagendijk.xs4all.nl> wrote: > >> > On Tue, 2008-09-30 at 15:20 -0400, m. allan noah wrote: > >> >> is the existing sanei_udp code of any use to your driver? > >> >> > >> > I started off re-using the code I wrote for the CUPS bjnp backend. I am > >> > considering re-writing the code to re-use sanei_udp and sanei_tcp code, > >> > but a lot of the code is about message formatting and parsing. Re-use > >> > will help in porting to other platforms (I am on x86_64 Linux). > >> > > >> > >> It remains to be seen that any other backends will ever use it, so i > >> would be inclined to keep as much of it with the backend as possible. > >> using the existing sanei_usb and sanei_tcp would be good if you can, > >> but not a requirement. > >> > >> N. Martin should weigh in at this point. > > It was Nicolas that recommended I ask the question on the list as he was > > not sure what the preferred route would be. It was actually him that > > brought up the argument of the IANA allocation :-). I would tend to > > agree with your argument that it is not very likely that any other > > backend will ever use the protocol implementation. > > IIRC, some backends have sanei_* portions inside of them, making it > easy to move later if required. how about that? > This is exactly what I did. I have a single c source file (pixma_bjnp.c) that uses sanei_bjnp_xxx names for the non-private functions, where pixma_bjnp.h defines the interface.
> i just added to you the accept filter, but i dont know if that was > what was blocking you. try again and we'll see. Ok, here we go..... Louis
