On Thu, Sep 13, 2007, Markus Rechberger wrote:
> Let's add the LKML to this.
>
> On 9/13/07, Markus Rechberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > On 9/12/07, Mauro Carvalho Chehab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I don't see any technical reason why tuner drivers should be moved to
> > > userspace.
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007, Markus Rechberger wrote:
Let's add the LKML to this.
On 9/13/07, Markus Rechberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/12/07, Mauro Carvalho Chehab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't see any technical reason why tuner drivers should be moved to
userspace. Looking at
Hi,
On 9/13/07, Johannes Stezenbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007, Markus Rechberger wrote:
We currently have an implementation that works, although
it works by downloading several firmwares for several devices
or even several countries. This is not what I want to have in
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007, Markus Rechberger wrote:
We currently have an implementation that works, although
it works by downloading several firmwares for several devices
or even several countries. This is not what I want to have in
future since it's not needed and it's also hard to manage for
On 9/13/07, Johannes Stezenbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Sep 13, 2007, Markus Rechberger wrote:
Let's add the LKML to this.
On 9/13/07, Markus Rechberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/12/07, Mauro Carvalho Chehab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't see any technical reason
It's only a step in development, I do not intend to keep the kernel
stub in the end, but I do intend to keep and use the userspace drivers
with i2c-dev in the long run, this requires a v4l/dvb library at the front
of everything.
Well, this was what adq and myself did with libdvbapi and mti,
On 9/13/07, Manu Abraham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's only a step in development, I do not intend to keep the kernel
stub in the end, but I do intend to keep and use the userspace drivers
with i2c-dev in the long run, this requires a v4l/dvb library at the front
of everything.
Well,
Markus Rechberger wrote:
On 9/13/07, Manu Abraham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's only a step in development, I do not intend to keep the kernel
stub in the end, but I do intend to keep and use the userspace drivers
with i2c-dev in the long run, this requires a v4l/dvb library at the front
of
On 9/13/07, Manu Abraham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Markus Rechberger wrote:
On 9/13/07, Manu Abraham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's only a step in development, I do not intend to keep the kernel
stub in the end, but I do intend to keep and use the userspace drivers
with i2c-dev in the long
Markus Rechberger wrote:
On 9/13/07, Manu Abraham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Markus Rechberger wrote:
On 9/13/07, Manu Abraham [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's only a step in development, I do not intend to keep the kernel
stub in the end, but I do intend to keep and use the userspace drivers
Also there is to consider a non technical aspect, whether vendors will
misuse this interface for binary only, undermining the efforts put in
for OSS drivers.
What holds companies for using the current available code putting it
into an rpm or deb package and releasing such code now?
On 9/13/07, Steven Toth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also there is to consider a non technical aspect, whether vendors will
misuse this interface for binary only, undermining the efforts put in
for OSS drivers.
What holds companies for using the current available code putting it
Am Donnerstag, den 13.09.2007, 16:36 -0400 schrieb Steven Toth:
Also there is to consider a non technical aspect, whether vendors will
misuse this interface for binary only, undermining the efforts put in
for OSS drivers.
What holds companies for using the current available
Markus Rechberger wrote:
On 9/13/07, Steven Toth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Also there is to consider a non technical aspect, whether vendors will
misuse this interface for binary only, undermining the efforts put in
for OSS drivers.
What holds companies for using the current
Well, I'd like to see Linus' opinion about this, because while
programmers keep discussing this, users are waiting forever... so if
Markus has a concrete and better solution, why don't use it?
And as far as I know, Markus is the programmer who is most
interested in this code. I
Let's add the LKML to this.
On 9/13/07, Markus Rechberger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 9/12/07, Mauro Carvalho Chehab <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Markus,
> >
> > Em Ter, 2007-08-14 às 16:31 +0200, Markus Rechberger escreveu:
> > > Following patch adds the possibility to implement tuner
Let's add the LKML to this.
On 9/13/07, Markus Rechberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 9/12/07, Mauro Carvalho Chehab [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Markus,
Em Ter, 2007-08-14 às 16:31 +0200, Markus Rechberger escreveu:
Following patch adds the possibility to implement tuner drivers in
Well, I'd like to see Linus' opinion about this, because while
programmers keep discussing this, users are waiting forever... so if
Markus has a concrete and better solution, why don't use it?
And as far as I know, Markus is the programmer who is most
interested in this code. I
101 - 118 of 118 matches
Mail list logo
