From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 9 08:25:51 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 027FC16A4CE for ; Sat, 9 Apr 2005 08:25:51 +0000 (GMT) Received: from wproxy.gmail.com (wproxy.gmail.com [64.233.184.204]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 67DEC43D49 for ; Sat, 9 Apr 2005 08:25:50 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from kulminaator@gmail.com) Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 36so295344wra for ; Sat, 09 Apr 2005 01:25:46 -0700 (PDT) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:cc:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:references; b=Ua6IGNoyYB2QkP0QNSNZcn5qcqX5iTOb7oy1FdR0LtARouMTl1z777w7Y65QSCZN8FjSd0ACiIvVfB3FY+bDtPDywzDYdnNeboxVrH+onwCgkTEdnx1h2GbsIXdSignOo2+eK53JRXVpyHhSijTt96jjH9y8iu4XmNF4a/iyGuM= Received: by 10.54.53.38 with SMTP id b38mr408218wra; Sat, 09 Apr 2005 01:25:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.54.56.39 with HTTP; Sat, 9 Apr 2005 01:25:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 10:25:46 +0200 From: Martin Roos To: Eric Masson In-Reply-To: <86k6ndq9mz.fsf@srvbsdnanssv.interne.kisoft-services.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable References: <4256B6DD.1070800@nurfuerspam.de> <86k6ndq9mz.fsf@srvbsdnanssv.interne.kisoft-services.com> cc: Markus Dolze cc: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org Subject: Re: irda devices support X-BeenThere: freebsd-hardware@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list Reply-To: Martin Roos List-Id: General discussion of FreeBSD hardware List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 09 Apr 2005 08:25:51 -0000 i certainly dont think that every userlevel application should worry about implementing the irda stack itself ... this is kindof wierd (would you develope an ufs for each application that wants to use your data on your ufs formatted disk ? or would every network application have to own their own implementation of tcp stack ? i don't think so ...) besides, if there are certain hardware pieces like this usb dongle, then implementing a device on a framework in the kernel is certainly easier than inventing the whole wheel again. the linux driver for my irda dongle is pretty small. but writing all it by myself for freebsd wont probably be worth the result. birda seems to be a quite shallow solution with even shallower docs, and it doesn't seem to have a clue how to use an usb dongle as an irda device. (you can't just handle the ugen device as an infrared port, it behaves pretty much differently :) ) i am looking at it's code hoping to find some way to modify it to make it interact with the usb device ... but since the application wasn't designed for such hacks this can take quite a while. On Fri, 08 Apr 2005 22:46:44 +0200, Eric Masson wrote: > Martin Roos writes: >=20 > > imho freebsd's kernel couldn't possible really recognize any usb irda > > dongle because it really wouldn't have any idea what to 'do' with the > > device without an implementation of irda stack. >=20 > What makes you think that the irda protocol stack should be implemented > in kernel ? >=20 > Birda is a userland irda stack that uses a serial device as transport > media. >=20 > =C9ric Masson >=20 > --=20 > AB> Comment cela peut-il se d=E9bloquer ? > AT> Fuca. > Excusez-moi, je n'ai pas compris. Merci de r=E9pondre plus clairement. > -+- AB in Guide du Neuneu Usenet - Il est con c'type, h=E9 ! -+- >=20 --=20 ########## Martin Roos