[mythtv-users] Programming remote button bindings (WAS: What major features are planned for 0.27?)
Michael T. Dean
mtdean at thirdcontact.com
Fri Nov 30 17:26:54 UTC 2012
On 11/30/2012 12:08 PM, Michael T. Dean wrote:
> On 11/28/2012 06:08 PM, Simon Hobson wrote:
>> Michael T. Dean wrote:
>>>>> I still don't get why people think doing this (and repeating it with
>>>>> each upgrade--and on each system) is easier than creating (or,
>>>>> downloading) a single LIRC configuration file for the remote
>>>>> (lircd.conf) and a LIRC configuration for MythTV (~/.lircrc) and any
>>>>> other application you want to use with the remote, which can then be
>>>>> backed up with your other configuration files and just dropped in
>>>>> whenever you upgrade your distro or set up a new system or...
>> Since there is now in-kernel support, using an extra package/layer is
>> as sensible as having an extra package/software layer to make (say) a
>> keyboard work.
> Yeah, that would be crazy...
> http://kbd-project.org/ ( ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/utils/kbd/ )
> http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/XKeyboardConfig (
> ftp://ftp.x.org/pub/individual/data/xkeyboard-config/ )
> I suppose really, all we need is a kernel and drivers. I have no clue
> why so many developers create applications...
> In truth, the /only/ differences are a) keyboards are standardized and
> b) distros have excellent tools for configuring the keyboard properly
> for users (thanks, primarily, to a--the standardization I already
> mentioned). Just because you don't know the details of GNU/Linux and
> X architecture doesn't mean you should assume keyboards are simple.
> This is what I've been saying over and over--the GNU/Linux and X
> keyboard architecture is almost identical to the LIRC architecture in
> terms of its abstraction (and no one seems to question that keyboards
> work well and the architecture is good). Remotes are just /very/ much
> less standardized than keyboards and, therefore, are in even greater
> need of abstraction than keyboards.
Hehe, perhaps there's one more difference, too. There's no
built-in-to-X support for LIRC. So, maybe there needs to be X
integration, too, along with kernel integration, for things to be at the
point where we could say, "no need for LIRC, now" (though I'd have to
assume that the X integration would basically be the integration of
what's left of LIRC, now that the LIRC remote drivers are now integrated
into the kernel).
Before, LIRC was a set of remote drivers and configuration tools and a
daemon program for communication. Now, the remote drivers are all
distributed with the kernel, so all that's left of LIRC are the
configuration tools and daemon. I'd assume that X integration would
entail architecting some daemon (or X child) process and then creating
an X module that ships the configuration tools (for those who want to
create their own lircd.conf files or whatever).
More information about the mythtv-users