LCDproc development and user support list

Text archives Help


[Lcdproc] Why modules


Chronological Thread 
  • From: joris AT robijn.net (Joris Robijn)
  • Subject: [Lcdproc] Why modules
  • Date: Mon Aug 18 20:28:02 2003

On 15 Aug 2003 at 8:30, Thomas Runge wrote:

> On Thu, 14 Aug 2003, Joris Robijn wrote:
>
> > The big advantage of loadable modules is in packaging. In a binary distro
> > you can package all modules for all drivers. This does not require
> > dependencies to libs.
>
> Okay, nice example and nice explanation. I see your point, but
> I'm still not very comfortable with it ;-)
>
> How about a feature to build a static LCDd?

I've been thinking about this. Many multi-platform programs have support
for both static and dynamic modules. Like apache, python, probably many
others that I don't know.

Problem is usually that there needs to be a way to automatically activate
the drivers that are linked in. What I see is that they use different
ways to do dynamic and static.

I came to think of linking some drivers in LCDd, but change very little
in the module loading code. If you load a driver, you can point to LCDd
as the location of the driver. The usual code locates the API symbols
(using dlsym or a similar function), but in this case the symbols will be
found in LCDd (but what does dlsym care :). This would save a lot of
extra code.

I don't know if it is completely possible this way but if people like it
I can try some things.

Joris

--
Joris Robijn
<joris AT robijn.net>
Mobile: 06 288 41 964

// To understand recursion, we must first understand
recursion





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.

Top of page