2009/6/10 Joe Marcus Clarke <email@example.com>:
> On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 13:01 +1200, James Butler wrote:
>> 2009/6/10 Joe Marcus Clarke <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
>> > On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 01:52 +0200, Koop Mast wrote:
>> >> On Wed, 2009-06-10 at 10:33 +1200, James Butler wrote:
>> >> > Hi -gnome,
>> >> >
>> >> > A couple of weeks ago I was looking for info on DeviceKit on FreeBSD,
>> >> > when I found the "State of the FreeBSD GNOME Project" thread from
>> >> > earlier in the year, which mentions DeviceKit as a priority for
>> >> > porting. Has anyone stepped up to do this so far?
>> >> >
>> >> > -James Butler
>> >> I got something in the works. At the moment I'm working on what exactly
>> >> happens on linux.
>> > I had an idea to port DK to FreeBSD as a wrapper around HAL. The reason
>> > for this is that FreeBSD doesn't have udev (or sysfs), and a lot of
>> > effort went in to abstracted the various hardware properties in hal, so
>> > those methods should probably be leveraged. Libhal also provides a good
>> > API for performing many of the operations required by DK.
>> With DeviceKit's stated intention of replacing HAL, that would make
>> HAL a FreeBSD-only backend for DeviceKit. So much for abstraction :-)
> Yes. Technically udev is a Linux-only backend. I'm open to other
> suggestions. Certainly, if you want to do the port, I'm happy with
> anything that works provided it can support the various DK consumers.
I have done a little investigation, but I'm glad Koop has looked at it
first, as it would be a steep learning curve for me. Let me know if I
can help test.
>> > However, I haven't started any work on this. Yes, getting DK on FreeBSD
>> > is a priority, especially for GNOME 3.0.
I'm actually an Xfce user, but I guess Xfce will need to follow with
DeviceKit if HAL becomes obsolete.