[lcdproc] "named pipe" is different from /dev/lcd kernel code . :-)

[Joris Robijn]

> This will be more difficult if both MtxOrb drivers are separate
> processes, to coordinate drawing across multiple screens. With shared
> libraries, the same MtxOrb lib would control both screens, and so it
> would be easier to coordinate drawing.

If you do that, you can not use serial and parallel displays combined. 
The LCDd daemon should decide how to 'place' the available screens, not 
the drivers.

> This can also be done using .so files, no problem.
(...)
> I think this has added complexity, you would have to coordinate starting
> up more processes, and personally, I think it looks messy. Another
> advantage is it all runs under the same memory space, and is far easier
> to pass structures through memory rather than having to serialise the
> objects through the pipes.

Indeed .DLL is (almost) the same as .so. I like this far more than the 
named pipes.

> Using libtool would hopefully remove any OS-specific complexity.

But disadv: it is again an extra dependency.
Tell more about this lib...

Joris

-- 
 Joris Robijn <joris@robijn.net>
 Home: 053 4311 553
 Mobile: 06 288 41 964

 // To understand recursion, we must first understand recursion


-----------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list send a blank message to
lcdproc-unsubscribe@lists.omnipotent.net