On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 01:03:32AM +0200, Piotr Gluszenia Slawinski wrote: > >the "standard" is pretty much defined by what the driver can take. If it > >can't parse the protocol then the device is rather useless anyway. > >but really, writing a serial kernel driver is rather trivial and has a > >higher chance of actually working long-term than dragging the old input > >drivers along. > > as long as it'll be maintained, well written, and pulled into > mainline at all ;) > > now i also realized that as fpit driver uses just serial port, > it could be perhaps just translated in software , and simple > userspace translator similiar to how ppl used joysticks in thinkpads > (i recall it was sth like gpm relay) could be used . this way > relatively simple code would be created requiring no periodic > mainteance, interfacing with more 'standard' X input driver.
once it's in the kernel, the kernel driver will fulfill exactly those requirements... imo software that doesn't require maintainance is a pipe-dream though. Cheers, Peter > then one of obstacles here is that fpit has no gpm driver ;) > but it's just general idea for possibly making such devices least > mainteance-labour consuming in future and not requirin destabilising > whole system by introducing third party kernel drivers written by > lazy and unqualified ppl ;) _______________________________________________ [email protected]: X.Org support Archives: http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/xorg Info: http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg Your subscription address: [email protected]
