On Thu, 2007-12-06 at 10:26 +0000, John Carr wrote: > On 12/6/07, Mark Ellis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Morning all > > > > Sorry about the messy subject, I'm on a bit of an information fishing > > expedition. > > > > Putting aside for the moment the recently mentioned ideas about *dccm > > and hal integration (because that seems to me much better for a long > > term goal) I want to get odccm to be all that it can be, before I get > > distracted again (I can hear my gnome-ification of kcemirror > > calling...). I also don't think it will take that long. > > In synce tradition, what you are describing tastes like "mdccm" :) > > What are we talking about with HAL integration? Pushing properties > into HAL is a good goal, but not urgent. Getting everything to "just > work" when you plug in is, IMO, very important and I guess what I > originally meant. I don't really like the idea of having odccm and > sync-engine running all the time though. >
Fair point, and I can see where you want to go with the HAL idea, but my brain is unwilling to think about it too much :) > > DHCP has been mentioned a few times, so ok run a dhcp server on the > > linux box, set the device to use dhcp, but what about an ip for the > > linux box's end of the connection. Couldn't just get any other dhcp ip > > and claculate a netmask, surely there would be routing chaos ! Anybody > > have any idea how this is supposed to work ? > > Isn't the DHCP server on the phone? For the moto q's you had to > dhclient rndis0, so yes I think the device is packing DHCP. And yes, I > fear the utter chaos too. > Really !? My first thought is, How Odd. Actually I remember someone in the past insinuating something like that, just before I made odccm's ip setup configurable, but I thought I was misunderstanding. I suppose that would work though, *dccm would pick up the new interface and dhclient it rather than assign a static address. But then how does the device know what addresses it can use to avoid clashes ? >From odccm's code I've assumed an rndis interface is a point to point connection, but I think I know less than I need ! > Your in the UK aren't you? If i can get my old WM5 device working i'd > happily loan it you for testing. On the condition that you are then > more HAL friendly :P > > John Cool, yep I'm in Surrey, I'll definitely consider that. For now could you send an ifconfig of an interface, and anything else you think may help my understanding ? I'm coming around to the HAL idea actually, but I'm not that aware of how much you can do. Would it go something like this. 1) Register a device type with HAL, so when a WM is connected it starts a *dccm. 2) Said *dccm, which would be one process per device, then configures the interface, provides a keep alive if required. 3) *dccm then advertises the device, either through HAL or on dbus as odccm does. 4) On disconnect, that particular *dccm cleans up and terminates. Sound about right ? If so, some questions. 1) How does *dccm know what ip configurations it can use, and which may already be in use by other devices ? We no longer have centralised data in a single process. 2) How would we send a 'device connected' signal to the likes of trayicon and raki ? Multiple processes couldn't bind to a single dbus address, can HAL actively send arbitrary events ? Sigh, time to read up on HAL I guess :) Mark ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: The Future of Linux Business White Paper from Novell. From the desktop to the data center, Linux is going mainstream. Let it simplify your IT future. http://altfarm.mediaplex.com/ad/ck/8857-50307-18918-4 _______________________________________________ SynCE-Devel mailing list SynCE-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/synce-devel
