<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/" />
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_ASSIGNED "
title="ASSIGNED - Provide a udev handle from the libinput device"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85573#c3">Comment # 3</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_ASSIGNED "
title="ASSIGNED - Provide a udev handle from the libinput device"
href="https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=85573">bug 85573</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:peter.hutterer@who-t.net" title="Peter Hutterer <peter.hutterer@who-t.net>"> <span class="fn">Peter Hutterer</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to Bastien Nocera from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=85573#c2">comment #2</a>)
<span class="quote">> That's quite a flippant approach. If you couldn't depend the caller behaving
> properly, you'd get crashes anyway. And valgrind would tell you where the
> problem is without a doubt.</span >
Yeah, but you'd see the crash in libinput first, then have to debug/valgrind to
find out it's in the caller. all of which wastes human resources.
<span class="quote">> What devices wouldn't have udev handles, and what devices wouldn't have a
> device node?</span >
some virtualised/emulated devices may not have a normal node, e.g.
keysym-producing keyboards.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>