On Fri, 2008-05-09 at 12:25 -0700, David Rees wrote: > On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 12:10 PM, Jarod Wilson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Fri, 2008-05-09 at 12:00 -0700, David Rees wrote: > >> Last time I tried using lirc strictly from Fedora, I had problems with > >> the lirc_serial driver. IIRC, at some point in time it wasn't included > >> with the kernel. I see that it is now on my Fedora 8 machine, so I'll > >> try removing the ATrpms versions of lirc and see if the upstream > >> versions work. > > Just switched over to the RPMs from koji and got everything migrated > and working. Here's what I had installed before: > > lirc-0.8.3-73_cvs20071109.fc8 > lirc-lib-0.8.3-74_cvs20080314.fc8 > lirc-kmdl-2.6.24.5-85.fc8-0.8.3-74_cvs20080314.fc8 > > I removed the kmdl and then tried to upgrade using the new lirc and > lirc-libs, but lirc complained that it was older than the ATrpms > version. So then I tried --oldpackage, but then lirc-libs conflicted > with lirc-lib from ATrpms. > > Finally just removed lirc and lirc-lib with --nodeps then reinstalled > lirc and lirc-libs.
Yeah, part of my original complaint was that the atrpms packages were rpm-newer than the fedora 0.8.3 final packages, despite being a ~2mo old pre-0.8.3 cvs snap. :) > ATrpms uses /etc/sysconfig/lircd, Fedora uses /etc/sysconfig/lirc so I > had to transfer my lircd options over. And similarly, service lircd start vs. service lirc start. > Unloaded the old lirc modules I had loaded, loaded the ones from the > kernel and stopped/started lircd. Restarted mythwelcome and > mythfrontend and everything seems to still work. So from my point of > view, looks good! :-) Excellent. I've been using the in-kernel stuff for quite a while myself, with lirc_i2c, lirc_mceusb and lirc_mceusb2 (I have something like 6 different IR receivers now...) > > Yep, lirc patches have been in the Fedora kernels since sometime in the > > 2.6.23 timeframe, including the kernel F8 originally shipped with, iirc. > > I swear I tried using Fedora lirc when I upgraded this machine to F8, > but I could be wrong... Maybe it was some other issue that kept it > from working. Hrm, beats me, I think I've been using them since the day I patched them into the kernel. > Is Fedora still shipping lirc patches with recent kernels? Yes. Although I need to refresh them -- there's a just-fixed-right-before-0.8.3 segfault or oops with lirc_i2c and 2.6.25 that I need to get taken care of. > Are you working on getting them upstream into Linus' kernel? Yes. Although working with upstream is... slow. Its high-latency, but upstream has already taken a ton of patches I've thrown at them to get lirc much closer to at least patching checkpatch.pl muster and replace some deprecated interfaces. > > I did talk with Ryan Pisani on this topic a bit, sounds like there may > > be a few drivers in the ATrpms package that aren't in the kernel for > > whatever reason. Assuming this is the only compelling reason for > > out-of-tree builds anymore, I'd either suggest the atrpms packages only > > carry those modules, or we figure out what's required to build them in > > with the kernel. User-space though, I can't think of any reason for > > duplication. > > Neither can I. And I also think that keeping as much as possible > upstream simplifies things for the end users as well. Axel, anything to add here? -- Jarod Wilson [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ atrpms-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.atrpms.net/mailman/listinfo/atrpms-devel
