[mythtv] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: pvr-350 performance patch - simplified

[David Engel]

On Fri, Feb 04, 2005 at 08:33:56PM -0000, John Harvey wrote:
> No 0.2 had a compatibility interface to support 0.1.9. 
> So the new driver is backwards compatible.

That's all well and good, as it should be.

> 0.1.9 is not forwards compatible which is the dependency you have added.
> 
> As for a bug in the driver, I believe it is considered to be Alpha and
> therefore subject to change.

My point is there was no good reason for breaking things.  The ioctl
numbers didn't have to be changed from 'just some values I picked for
now'.  New names could have been used for the more correct _IO* macro
versions.  At some future date when the driver has really stablized,
the old ioctls could be removed.

Doing it the way it was done just makes it harder for applications to
take advantage of features in newer drivers, but still be compatible
with older ones.

David
-- 
David Engel
gigem at comcast.net