Hi, sorry had no network connection yesterday.
On Thursday, May 24, 2012 06:51:32 AM Agocs Laszlo.P wrote: > Hi, > > Please do not merge the plug-ins. A monolithic "evdev" monster plug-in is > not desirable and would certainly not classify as "generic" anymore. > > The "static device discovery" should check the supported event types from > the devices (this needs opening, an ioctl, and some bittesting so might not > be lightning fast but on specific udev-less embedded devices it could be > good enough). This is exactly what udev does too when it decides the device > class (ID_INPUT_*). Although I'm not sure about the value this feature > brings: if the embedded system does not have udev then its input device > configuration is likely to be quite static so a simple hardcoded > specification of the device nodes should be enough. I was trying to avoid the quirks that udev does here, but I see your point in having more straight forward evdev* plugins, which handle specific cases, especially when looking at the evdevtouch. I will prepare a change adding some device detection I can test, would be great if you could then add tests for touch discovery. > I somewhat disagree on the broken out of the box experience too: Specifying > what input devices to use via -plugin parameters is perfectly fine on an > embedded device because you will typically know what type of devices are or > can get connected. We just have several Qt users/companies which asked the same question about how to get keyboard input, as they simply used eglfs and didn't know about the -plugin evdev* thing at all. It would be just convenient for them if it simply works. Johannes _______________________________________________ Development mailing list [email protected] http://lists.qt-project.org/mailman/listinfo/development
