On Fri, Jul 06, 2012 at 11:11:55AM -0700, Chase Douglas wrote: > On 07/05/2012 04:41 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote: > >On Thu, Jul 05, 2012 at 02:19:33PM -0700, Chase Douglas wrote: > >>On 07/03/2012 11:03 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote: > >>>On Tue, Jul 03, 2012 at 11:40:25AM -0700, Chase Douglas wrote: > >>>>On 07/02/2012 11:44 PM, Peter Hutterer wrote: > >>>>>evemu doesn't export this information and even evemu-device just trawls > >>>>>through the file system to print this info. So do the same here, noting > >>>>>the > >>>>>time before evemu_create() and the ctime of the new device file. If the > >>>>>latter is later than the former and the device names match, we can assume > >>>>>this is our device. > >>>> > >>>>I just want to point out that it's a deficiency in uinput, not in > >>>>evemu, in case anyone had any thoughts of trying to fix evemu > >>>>instead. > >>> > >>>I did try. This could easily be part of evemu, running this exact same code > >>>right after the UI_DEV_CREATE call. Unfortunately evemu_create() takes a > >>>const struct so we can't save it easily without breaking ABI. > >> > >>Well, evemu could try to guess, just as this code does. What I meant > >>was more that uinput is deficient in that there's no way to be 100% > >>sure. That's the main reason why we didn't bother putting code like > >>this into evemu directly. > > > >the one advantage evemu has though is that it's in the best position > >to guess given that it just created the device and has easy access to all > >other information. plus, it wouldn't require duplicating the code across > >other projects. > > Yeah, good point. Maybe I should just take the > find_newest_device_node_with_name function in evemu-device.c and > copy it into the library proper?
yeah, it wouldn't hurt to have it there. Cheers, Peter _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org development Archives: http://lists.x.org/archives/xorg-devel Info: http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
