On 2/12/09, Ludovic Rousseau <[email protected]> wrote: > > I thought of using the stable API to implement some other application APIs, > > and maybe convince developers who accessed the reader directly to use > > the new infrastructure (GnuPG, coolkey etc). > > > It may be hard to convince the GnuPG project. GnuPG already uses PC/SC > so I do not see any advantage to switch to another API.
GnuPG: Look at scd/ccid-driver.* > > Coolkey is also using PC/SC. And the code is working on Windows and Mac OS X. I was confused between coolkey and cyberjack, sorry. There are more. > You clearly propose to replace the PC/SC API with something different, right? > And migrate applications (GnuPG, coolkey, etc.) to this new API? And > OpenSC also? On the contrary, I want to drop the other interfaces from OpenSC to make it simpler. And use PC/SC where ever it is sufficient. I don't know why GnuPG chose to develop their own driver, I guess it has something to do with complexity (especially the wrapper pth->pthreads) and the hate of Microsoft originating <whatever>. I guess cyberjack needed some more functionality, I hope we can figure out their reasons, although it was difficult to work with them on their PKCS#11 compliance. > > > What do you think about the other tasks/assumptions? > > > No problem wth the other tasks. Also with the support of *BSD and Linux? If so, I will start working. Alon. _______________________________________________ opensc-devel mailing list [email protected] http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
