| 1 |
Based Karl |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
Keep the bloaties at bay |
| 4 |
Rock on |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
August 23, 2021 1:08 PM, karl@××××××××.se wrote: |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> Dr. Canek Peláez Valdés: |
| 9 |
> ... |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
>> Where do you get that impression from? The OP needs handling keyboard and |
| 12 |
>> mouse (as per his first email), and to do that in Linux these days, you |
| 13 |
>> basically need udev, because xf86-input-mouse and xf86-input-keyboard are |
| 14 |
>> going the way of the dodo. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> It is inconvenient that thoose two goes away. |
| 17 |
> Regarding udev, it has never supported serial mice, so it doesn't help |
| 18 |
> me. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> ... |
| 21 |
>> My point is that it's not his call; it's the call of the developers of the |
| 22 |
>> software that he decided to use. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Poeple write whatever software they want to or are paid to do. |
| 25 |
> It is my call if I want to use that software or not. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
>> Yes I take your point, but bloat is bloat, and bloat is a liability. |
| 28 |
>> |
| 29 |
>> There is no bloat; the developers *need* to handle the dynamic hardware |
| 30 |
>> case *and* the static hardware case. With udev, they handle both; otherwise |
| 31 |
>> there would be two code routes: one for static and another for dynamic |
| 32 |
>> hardware. |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> ... |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> As I wrote before, udev does not handle serial mice, so udev does not |
| 37 |
> solve anything for me nor does it help me in any way to run my systems. |
| 38 |
> Udev is just something pushed on me for no gain except possible to |
| 39 |
> satisfy some dependancy touted to be beneficial. So in this very |
| 40 |
> specific case it can be considered "bloat" if you wish to use that |
| 41 |
> kind of words. |
| 42 |
> |
| 43 |
> My guess is that it is more useful on laptop than on a desktop box |
| 44 |
> or an industrial computer. |
| 45 |
> |
| 46 |
> /// |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> As a side note, from what I understand, udev today is mostly about |
| 49 |
> usb-devices because that is where the dynamic hardware comes from |
| 50 |
> today (at least when we are not talking about hotplugging cpus, |
| 51 |
> memory cards, io-cards and such (but that is more of a enterprise |
| 52 |
> problem than a small system problem. |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> Serial ports are darn easy to implement in hardware and |
| 55 |
> softwere. |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> E.g. if I have a program connecting to a device using a serial |
| 58 |
> and it is disconnected, I can just reconnect it and nothing |
| 59 |
> special happens, noting to be done in software except logging. |
| 60 |
> The same device via usb, the dis-/reconnect will close the |
| 61 |
> port and make it vanish forcing med to find out find out where the |
| 62 |
> new /dev file is and reopen and reinitialize it. |
| 63 |
> In hardware, mcu's without usb are cheap and their serial port |
| 64 |
> are simpe to program and the serial port "stack" is vanishingly small. |
| 65 |
> Just look at the tty_* files in |
| 66 |
> http://aspodata.se/git/openhw/libarm |
| 67 |
> http://aspodata.se/git/openhw/libarm/stm32 |
| 68 |
> For usb support, I need an usb stack (which is larger), e.g. |
| 69 |
> https://github.com/libopencm3/libopencm3/tree/master/lib/usb |
| 70 |
> I need to understand the usb protocol and all thoose structs to fill |
| 71 |
> in, and in the end I get a system that is harder to program on the |
| 72 |
> host side for no gain other than that +5V is provided by usb. |
| 73 |
> |
| 74 |
> Regards, |
| 75 |
> /Karl Hammar |
Archives