|Re: [hatari-devel] Re: Hatari SCSI Driver patch|
[ Thread Index |
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/hatari-devel Archives
- To: hatari-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [hatari-devel] Re: Hatari SCSI Driver patch
- From: Uwe Seimet <Uwe.Seimet@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 22 Oct 2015 12:29:46 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1445509786; l=1406; s=domk; d=seimet.de; h=In-Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Disposition: Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Subject:To:From:Date; bh=pCtr46VFBTcTpLGKzr2zeQ1FrQaDpl0OsCDD3QnmGqc=; b=P2dtgafuhb7atplGaiHYEkp7urTYK8/+lCQPc/SQy22ZyGEN8zqHlMz5hNHHroKgGa9 r1wZyXPIDzc25eu/gr6wT8Cu54sP/efzX4b9HHq5RtEVJf31/23QYZr+kkXisAilGtpNl v5ZNtLlwcoPVkAd/ilfaPc/MfE/vZAaND14=
I see what you mean, but as far as I can tell the SCSI Driver code is rather
small compared to other non-optional Hatari features. If there are concerns
that the Hatari binary gets too big for some platforms it would probably be
useful to make more features optional, e.g. 68030 support.
Anyway, as a first step I have added automatic detection of whether libudev
is available. I will send Eero the diffs.
> Le 19/10/2015 23:25, Uwe Seimet a écrit :
> > Hi,
> > The SCSI Driver itself does not have any influence on the functionality
> > of Hatari. Only when the TOS stub is started the native SCSI Driver code
> > is used.
> > Anyway, there are several ways to switch off parts of the functionality,
> > but only libudev may be something that one might not want to depend on.
> > On the other hand, I wonder whether any Linux distribution runs without it.
> I have no personal opinion on enabling scsi driver and it's not a
> problem for me if it's built by default, but one could imagine some
> users who want to build the smallest hatari binary possible (running on
> rasperry pi for example), and in that case even if libudev is found you
> might want to not enable the scsi driver part to keep the program as
> small as possible.
> That's where a global switch in configure / cmake could be handy.