On Thu, 27.03.08 22:44, Colin Guthrie (gmane at colin.guthr.ie) wrote: > Lennart Poettering wrote: > > module-tunnel is certainly the worst module you could have > > picked. It's complicated, full of #ifdefs and doesn't even support all > > the newest fancy features of the core. > > Well I've only just started looking over it (and completely agree re the > #ifdefs) so not really done anything yet. Is there a better -sink module > you'd recommend as a starting point? Uh. Good question. The pipe sink maybe? > >> As I hinted above I'll either modify or copy the zeroconf-discover one. > >> I presume you'd prefer to make a separate module? > > > > Hmm, depends. It's up to you. A #ifdef based solution might be useful, > > i.e. conditional compilation of the RAOP and module-tunnel parts of > > zc-discover. That way you'd be able to share a single source and build > > two seperate modules of it. OTOH conditional compilation is a bit out > > of fashion these days. The alternative might be to split zc-disocver > > into three C files, and then compile two of them for one module and > > then two others for the other modules, if you understand what I mean. > > Yeah I see what you mean. I'll see how it goes as this part is the final > hurdle and wont be attempted until I get the actual sink loading OK! > Having only started reading the raop_play code, I'm getting worried I've > bitten off more than I can chew with all it's RTP and callbacks etc. but > I'll still take a good crack at it! RTP is actually a pretty simple protocol. And is it happens we already have an implementation of RTP in PA, hence you probably can share a lot of code. Lennart -- Lennart Poettering Red Hat, Inc. lennart [at] poettering [dot] net ICQ# 11060553 http://0pointer.net/lennart/ GnuPG 0x1A015CC4