[linux-dvb] Re: CA_ZAP/DVB libs

Manu Abraham manu at kromtek.com
Thu Jul 7 20:01:56 CEST 2005

Andrew de Quincey wrote:
> On Thursday 07 July 2005 18:09, Manu Abraham wrote:
>>Andrew de Quincey wrote:
>>>Well here is my opinion:
>>>Should we have "one library to rule them all", or split it into seperate
>>>sublibraries? Having seperate libraries is cleaner architecturally, but
>>>might be overkill... anyone have any really good arguments either way?
>>Having sublibraries will keep confusion to an utmost maximum, 
> I assume you mean minimum here :)

Sure no doubt .. I am not saying we need to have a lib for everything, 
but we are at a position where we do not know exactly, what DVB hardware 
might look like at all.. :-) So we should have some sort of a generic 
base on which future expansions could be done, rather than pulling it 
apart everytime something has to be done. Even if it would have to be 
done, in a split way, the effort required there would be minimal.

A possible way i considered was,

1) a parser
2) conditional access (Common Interface or UnCommon Interface) ;-)
3) configs
4) api specific

>>and will 
>>be helpful in extending the same at a later stage in any aspect, if
>>required. IMHO this would be advantageous..
>>For example the main issue that i had initially to go with ca_zap from
>>scratch was based upon the same idea. Tomorrow is somebody needs to do
>>xyz, it should provide expandability for the same, rather than a tightly
>>integrated infrastructure.
> Yeah, makes sense to me.


Phew, I had been trying to convey this for a long time ..


More information about the linux-dvb mailing list