From owner-freebsd-hardware@FreeBSD.ORG Sat Apr 9 18:27:49 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 40EFA16A4CE for ; Sat, 9 Apr 2005 18:27:49 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail23.sea5.speakeasy.net (mail23.sea5.speakeasy.net [69.17.117.25]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 03A8743D31 for ; Sat, 9 Apr 2005 18:27:49 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) Received: (qmail 13714 invoked from network); 9 Apr 2005 18:27:48 -0000 Received: from server.baldwin.cx ([216.27.160.63]) (envelope-sender )AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP for ; 9 Apr 2005 18:27:48 -0000 Received: from [192.168.0.15] (osx.baldwin.cx [192.168.0.15]) (authenticated bits=0) by server.baldwin.cx (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id j39IRgDE097376; Sat, 9 Apr 2005 14:27:42 -0400 (EDT) (envelope-from jhb@FreeBSD.org) In-Reply-To: References: <4256B6DD.1070800@nurfuerspam.de> <86k6ndq9mz.fsf@srvbsdnanssv.interne.kisoft-services.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v619.2) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Message-Id: <2b8b3f59dfd955375bf96f1bf52be9fa@FreeBSD.org> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit From: John Baldwin Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2005 14:27:43 -0400 To: Martin Roos X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.619.2) X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.8 required=4.2 tests=ALL_TRUSTED autolearn=failed version=3.0.2 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.0.2 (2004-11-16) on server.baldwin.cx 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 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 18:27:49 -0000 On Apr 9, 2005, at 4:25 AM, Martin Roos wrote: > 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 > ...) You can always write a library that has drivers in it. OS X uses this approach for things like scanners and USB HID devices for example. -- John Baldwin <>< http://www.FreeBSD.org/~jhb/ "Power Users Use the Power to Serve" = http://www.FreeBSD.org