new: geo/gypsy
Gypsy is a gpsd replacement, used by OpenMoko FSO distribution. Compiles and runs; not yet tested with an actual GPS connected (left my puck GPS at home this week). $ more pkg/DESCR Gypsy is a GPS multiplexing daemon which allows multiple clients to access GPS data from multiple GPS sources concurrently. Gypsy uses D-Bus to notify clients about location changes, sitting on the system bus, issuing signals as the GPS data changes. This design allows clients to only be notified about the changes they care about and ignore the rest. Gypsy has fine grained signals, so a client only interested in position changes will not be woken up for any other changes like, for example, satellite detail changes. Gypsy is designed to be usable on all manner of systems, from low powered devices (such as Nokia N810 and Openmoko Neo) to regular high powered desktop systems. As the signals it emits are fine grained applications are woken up only when they absolutely need to be, keeping power requirements to a minimum. Gypsy was designed to fix the numerous design flaws found in GPSD. These are compiled at http://gypsy.freedesktop.org/why-not-gpsd.html. Included with Gypsy is libgypsy which is a GObject based C wrapper for the D-Bus API making writing clients very simple, although any language with D-Bus bindings can be used to write a Gypsy client (See simple-gps-python.py in the Gypsy sources for an example written in Python). -- Port is at http://www.darwinsys.com/openbsd/myports/gypsy.tar.gz
Re: new: geo/gypsy
* Ian Darwin wrote: Gypsy is a gpsd replacement, used by OpenMoko FSO distribution. Compiles and runs; not yet tested with an actual GPS connected (left my puck GPS at home this week). $ more pkg/DESCR Gypsy is a GPS multiplexing daemon which allows multiple clients to access GPS data from multiple GPS sources concurrently. Gypsy uses D-Bus to notify clients about location changes, sitting on the system bus, issuing signals as the GPS data changes. This design allows clients to only be notified about the changes they care about and ignore the rest. Gypsy has fine grained signals, so a client only interested in position changes will not be woken up for any other changes like, for example, satellite detail changes. Gypsy is designed to be usable on all manner of systems, from low powered devices (such as Nokia N810 and Openmoko Neo) to regular high powered desktop systems. As the signals it emits are fine grained applications are woken up only when they absolutely need to be, keeping power requirements to a minimum. Gypsy was designed to fix the numerous design flaws found in GPSD. These are compiled at http://gypsy.freedesktop.org/why-not-gpsd.html. So how does this compare to gpsd for real applications? I am asking since the main gpsd developer is also an OpenBSD developer, and maybe there are ways to fix the problems in gpsd? Oh, and I find this rude. Included with Gypsy is libgypsy which is a GObject based C wrapper for the D-Bus API making writing clients very simple, although any language with D-Bus bindings can be used to write a Gypsy client (See simple-gps-python.py in the Gypsy sources for an example written in Python). -- Port is at http://www.darwinsys.com/openbsd/myports/gypsy.tar.gz -- Marc Balmer, Micro Systems, Wiesendamm 2a, Postfach, CH-4019 Basel, Switzerland http://www.msys.ch/ http://www.vnode.ch/ In God we trust, in C we code.
Re: new: geo/gypsy
Marc Balmer wrote: Gypsy uses D-Bus to notify clients about location changes, sitting on the system bus, issuing signals as the GPS data changes. This design allows clients to only be notified about the changes they care about and ignore the rest. Gypsy has fine grained signals, so a client only interested in position changes will not be woken up for any other changes like, for example, satellite detail changes. Gypsy is designed to be usable on all manner of systems, from low powered devices (such as Nokia N810 and Openmoko Neo) to regular high powered desktop systems. As the signals it emits are fine grained applications are woken up only when they absolutely need to be, keeping power requirements to a minimum. Gypsy was designed to fix the numerous design flaws found in GPSD. These are compiled at http://gypsy.freedesktop.org/why-not-gpsd.html. So how does this compare to gpsd for real applications? I am asking since the main gpsd developer is also an OpenBSD developer, and maybe there are ways to fix the problems in gpsd? Oh, and I find this rude. I didn't necessarily agree, that's why I put it in quotes. There are lots of things in DESCRs that are lifted from the upstream propaganda. The Gypsy developer doesn't like the protocol gpsd uses, nor the fact that its clients have to listen to every line that it spits out. So gypsy using dbus has an event model with 5 or so different events you can listen for. I don't see how gpsd could be changed without fundamentally altering gpsd's protocol. Of course if you want to try, please feel free. Otherwise, it's an alternative. There are lots of alternatives. Choice is good.
Re: new: geo/gypsy
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Marc Balmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Ian Darwin wrote: Gypsy was designed to fix the numerous design flaws found in GPSD. These are compiled at http://gypsy.freedesktop.org/why-not-gpsd.html. So how does this compare to gpsd for real applications? I am asking since the main gpsd developer is also an OpenBSD developer, and maybe there are ways to fix the problems in gpsd? Oh, and I find this rude. DBUS is more crap I don't need or want on my machines, the regular gpsd serves my needs very well. I'm sure I could write a why-not-dbus-gypsy.html page, but I can't be arsed. I'm surprised that I'm even taking the time to reply to this. If it works, let them co-exist. GPSD does have some kind of DBUS support... but I have no use for it so I can't say how well it works. CK -- GDB has a 'break' feature; why doesn't it have 'fix' too?
Re: new: geo/gypsy
On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Marc Balmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Ian Darwin wrote: Gypsy was designed to fix the numerous design flaws found in GPSD. These are compiled at http://gypsy.freedesktop.org/why-not-gpsd.html. So how does this compare to gpsd for real applications? I am asking since the main gpsd developer is also an OpenBSD developer, and maybe there are ways to fix the problems in gpsd? Oh, and I find this rude. DBUS is more crap I don't need or want on my machines, the regular gpsd serves my needs very well. I'm sure I could write a why-not-dbus-gypsy.html page, but I can't be arsed. I'm surprised that I'm even taking the time to reply to this. If it works, let them co-exist. GPSD does have some kind of DBUS support... but I have no use for it so I can't say how well it works. What are you saying? I want to understand this very clearly. Are you two saying no to a new package? Or what is this fight about? Or do the little words twist your panties?
Re: new: geo/gypsy
* Theo de Raadt wrote: On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Marc Balmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Ian Darwin wrote: Gypsy was designed to fix the numerous design flaws found in GPSD. These are compiled at http://gypsy.freedesktop.org/why-not-gpsd.html. So how does this compare to gpsd for real applications? I am asking since the main gpsd developer is also an OpenBSD developer, and maybe there are ways to fix the problems in gpsd? Oh, and I find this rude. DBUS is more crap I don't need or want on my machines, the regular gpsd serves my needs very well. I'm sure I could write a why-not-dbus-gypsy.html page, but I can't be arsed. I'm surprised that I'm even taking the time to reply to this. If it works, let them co-exist. GPSD does have some kind of DBUS support... but I have no use for it so I can't say how well it works. What are you saying? I want to understand this very clearly. Are you two saying no to a new package? Or what is this fight about? I can only speak for myself: I am in no way objecting to this to go in. I was only commenting. Users should make the choice which GPS package they use, not us, not me. Nevertheless I think it is ok to post comments. Or do the little words twist your panties? -- Marc Balmer, Micro Systems, Wiesendamm 2a, Postfach, CH-4019 Basel, Switzerland http://www.msys.ch/ http://www.vnode.ch/ In God we trust, in C we code.
Re: new: geo/gypsy
So how does this compare to gpsd for real applications? I am asking since the main gpsd developer is also an OpenBSD developer, and maybe there are ways to fix the problems in gpsd? Oh, and I find this rude. DBUS is more crap I don't need or want on my machines, the regular gpsd serves my needs very well. I'm sure I could write a why-not-dbus-gypsy.html page, but I can't be arsed. I'm surprised that I'm even taking the time to reply to this. If it works, let them co-exist. GPSD does have some kind of DBUS support... but I have no use for it so I can't say how well it works. What are you saying? I want to understand this very clearly. Are you two saying no to a new package? Or what is this fight about? I can only speak for myself: I am in no way objecting to this to go in. I was only commenting. Users should make the choice which GPS package they use, not us, not me. Then why does it make a difference if you think it is rude? Can you not see that adds zero value, except that it might convince people working on ports that they should not continue because someone might think it is 'rude'? Nevertheless I think it is ok to post comments. Sure, talk all you want. But so can the authors of that original source. At least they were detailed in their explanation.
Re: new: geo/gypsy
i'm saying that if gypsy doesn't break existing stuff, then i have no problems with it. i'll probably never use gypsy because it doesn't do anything for me that gpsd can't already do, and it makes me install more software that i don't need. but if it solves a problem for somebody else, great. CK On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 12:43 PM, Theo de Raadt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, Dec 1, 2008 at 12:21 PM, Marc Balmer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * Ian Darwin wrote: Gypsy was designed to fix the numerous design flaws found in GPSD. These are compiled at http://gypsy.freedesktop.org/why-not-gpsd.html. So how does this compare to gpsd for real applications? I am asking since the main gpsd developer is also an OpenBSD developer, and maybe there are ways to fix the problems in gpsd? Oh, and I find this rude. DBUS is more crap I don't need or want on my machines, the regular gpsd serves my needs very well. I'm sure I could write a why-not-dbus-gypsy.html page, but I can't be arsed. I'm surprised that I'm even taking the time to reply to this. If it works, let them co-exist. GPSD does have some kind of DBUS support... but I have no use for it so I can't say how well it works. What are you saying? I want to understand this very clearly. Are you two saying no to a new package? Or what is this fight about? Or do the little words twist your panties? -- GDB has a 'break' feature; why doesn't it have 'fix' too?
