Adrian Cox wrote:
> I'm putting together a hardware support deb and rpm for a product. The hardware support is mostly udev rules, plus a small program which performs an ioctl to a USB device. These will ship with the product, as distributions will take a while to catch up. After the initial attachment, the device uses standard kernel drivers.
>
> Which do you think is better?
>
> 1) A C implementation of the ioctl, requiring a different compiled package for each architecture.
> 2) A Python implementation of the ioctl, allowing a single architecture independent package, but adding a python dependency.
Is that standard kernel drivers as in pre-existing driver, or your own
driver?
If the latter, use a sysfs attribute instead of ioctl, and distribute
a shell script.
If it's a pre-existing kernel driver, is there no sysfs/procfs way to
do what the ioctl does already?
-- Jamie
(text/plain)