From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3B8FA1580B9 for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 17:01:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ED73EE0A8D; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 17:01:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from turkos.aspodata.se (turkos.aspodata.se [185.140.117.226]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44D52E0A68 for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 17:01:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from turkos.aspodata.se (localhost.aspodata.se [127.0.0.1]) by turkos.aspodata.se (Postfix) with ESMTP id E32E78517F51 for ; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 19:01:33 +0200 (CEST) Received: by turkos.aspodata.se (Postfix, from userid 1000) id CE04D8517F54; Mon, 23 Aug 2021 19:01:33 +0200 (CEST) X-Mailer: exmh version 2.8.0 04/21/2012 with nmh-1.7+dev X-Exmh-Isig-CompType: repl X-Exmh-Isig-Folder: inbox From: karl@aspodata.se To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] X11 without udev/eudev In-reply-to: <20210823160738.208C58517F54@turkos.aspodata.se> References: <20210821201720.13F158517F49@turkos.aspodata.se> <20210822203110.5C6BB8517F53@turkos.aspodata.se> <18ae899b-a172-75ce-b7e5-b998fb672f46@youngman.org.uk> <20210823160738.208C58517F54@turkos.aspodata.se> Comments: In-reply-to karl@aspodata.se message dated "Mon, 23 Aug 2021 18:07:38 +0200." Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <20210823170133.CE04D8517F54@turkos.aspodata.se> Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 19:01:33 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: ClamAV using ClamSMTP X-Archives-Salt: 2633f808-3498-4a26-b762-f7cb2c55044b X-Archives-Hash: 63e3d5b9dc730f850870a10ee8379dcf Karl Hammar: > Dr. Canek Peláez Valdés: ... > > My point is that it's not his call; it's the call of the developers of the > > software that he decided to use. > > Poeple write whatever software they want to or are paid to do. > It is my call if I want to use that software or not. For what some people want to work on, here is an alternative api: https://github.com/idunham/libsysdev And what Anna gratiosly provided: https://github.com/illiliti/libudev-zero ... > > There is no bloat; the developers *need* to handle the dynamic hardware > > case *and* the static hardware case. With udev, they handle both; otherwise > > there would be two code routes: one for static and another for dynamic > > hardware. As an example of that is: https://gitlab.freedesktop.org/mesa/drm/-/blob/main/xf86drm.c The changes nessesary for a non-udev solution is smallish, and it doesn't have to resort to polling as in the udev case. A gui's need for pop-up windows when new devices are connected could just as well be handled separate to the system thing of /dev nodes, permissions and such. You don't need a daemon for that, it just that the udev people just merged the use cases. ... > As a side note, ... As an actual case, this is a prototype for a three way mouse to be used on ship bridges http://aspodata.se/git/openhw/boards_arm_aspo/mouse/ Switching a knob, I can send mouse events to three different computers, say for radar, maps, etc. It uses microsoft serial mouse protocol. This possible for low end mcu's since they contain multiple serial interfaces. If I had to use usb, well, not even a high end mcu's like stm32f4 has more than two usb ports. Regards, /Karl Hammar