GStreamer on freedesktop
david at fubar.dk
Tue Dec 9 15:58:15 EET 2003
On Tue, 2003-12-09 at 14:43, "Marc Boris Dürner" wrote:
> > You are right, it doesn't - my bad. I wonder where I had that idea from;
> > some old documentation I think; hard to say.. Sorry about the confusion.
> > In either case, I still think using glib in daemons/servers is sound.
> I would stay away from glib dependancies, but in the end all you really do
> with HAL is
> providing a reference implementation.
Please clarify what you mean by 'stay away'. Like you wouldn't use it or
encourage people not to use it in a distribution?
As for me providing 'a reference implementation' (to use your own
words), are you implying that you would write your own implementation in
C++ instead of using an implementation based on g-lib?
Note that even HAL got a specification document, it's not a spec in the
sense of ISO standards or RFC's that allow people to go away and write
implementations. It it were, it should be much longer. Most detail is
still in code; the way it should be, IMHO.
The only point of having the detailed HAL spec is to get a common
understanding of the quite complex task of managing hardware. In fact, I
don't really enjoy writing specs.
More information about the xdg