Yeasah Pell wrote:
Manu Abraham wrote:
Yeasah Pell wrote:
Really all I'm trying to suggest is that once the new API is made
available, every card should be accessible through it.
Yes, it will be that way. I think the confusion came in because i
mentioned the implementation of tuning algorithms, which need more
time to be implemented.
Anyway, will keep that thing separate, since i found that to cause
confusion as well.
Ok, sorry about the confusion. I think I now see where I got lost in
your original response. If I'm now understanding you correctly, then I
would answer Alan's original question:
Alan Nisota wrote:
While I was looking at the ver7 patch when I wrote that mail, I have
since looked at the rev7a version as well, and I dhave questions. I
understand how to use the new API, but am unsure what is expected from
an application perspective.
Specifically, if the API is version 3.2, does that mean that all cards
can be accessed with the new DVBFE ioctls (which would make things
relatively nice, as an app needs to support only one or the other as
defined at compile-time), or does each driver need to be ported to use
the new API, in which case there needs to be some way to designate
which cards support the new drivers?
With simply "all cards will be accessible through the new DVBFE
ioctls." Right?
Yes. Additionally the old one's would work exactly the same way, as it
used to do, for a predefined period of time.
If that means having a translation layer in the short term (i.e.
until all the drivers are updated), I think it might be a good idea
-- unless of course it's going to be almost as much work as just
updating all the old drivers, in which case it makes more sense to
just do that. But I'm not really fond of the idea of a lengthy
period of time wherein drivers slowly migrate from the old API to
the new one.
Regarding app. backward compatibility, we don't need a huge
translation, i will post those changes soon. But yet needed to know
whather the previous API changes were acceptable, waiting for JS's
ACK on that.
Johannes? Even if things may not be perfect at this point, can we call
it good enough to move forward? It's been bounced about for a good
long time now, and I'm not sure how much better it will get without
actually getting some code into circulation.
Will need the "official signature" from Johannes though. :-)
Manu
_______________________________________________
linux-dvb@xxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.linuxtv.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/linux-dvb
