I have never denied that. Equally what some see as a virtue is seen by others as a problem.What you see as a problem, others see as a virtue.Something is enforcing sole ownership of pins and, whatever that is, it is a problem compared to what used to be allowed.
That's a non sequitur.Do you drive without wearing a seatbelt?
Rather ironically, when I have complained about '/dev/gpiomem' direct register access being too unrestricted in the past, I have been told that's perfectly fine, that making people wear seatbelts would be too restrictive.
And, if wearing seatbelts should be compulsory, I would question why 'pinctrl' needed to duck out from under those to do what it does, why there is any need for a daemon if what we have is perfectly good enough ?
It seems clear to me that between 'you can do anything and everything' and the sole ownership model of 'ligbpiod', 'uAPI' or whatever, there is a middle ground.
No one has explained to me how two apps reading the same input pin is bad, why it is something which shouldn't be done, is something which must be prevented. One could say it's like only having one seatbelt and first come first served.
Statistics: Posted by hippy — Thu Oct 17, 2024 12:36 pm