Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: rockbox-dev Digest, Vol 32, Issue 13
Re: rockbox-dev Digest, Vol 32, Issue 13
From: Thomas Martitz <thomas47_at_arcor.de>
Date: Tue, 20 May 2008 14:41:52 +0200
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 19 May 2008 22:29:27 -0500
> From: Paul Louden <paulthenerd_at_gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Settings as a plugin
> To: Rockbox development <rockbox-dev_at_cool.haxx.se>
> Message-ID: <48324597.5000005_at_gmailcom>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15; format=flowed
> Significant Con #1: When running Rockbox from flash, the settings plugin
> need to use RAM and can end up of a different version than the in-flash
> Rockbox quite easily leaving settings unchangeable.
> Con #2: Plugin buffer can't be used for settings and a TSR plugin
> simultaneously leaving settings unchangeable. If you reserve a separate
> buffer for the settings plugin, outsourcing them is pointless.
I don't understand really understand what you're saying (probably my
limited English knowledge). Can you explain #1 a bit more? Also,w hy the
Plugin Buffer can't be used for that. (and what's a TSR plugin?).
Anyway, As a flash-based DAP User of course didn't think of the disk
spinning. But if, like Jonathan said, the plugins could remain in the
buffer until a new plugin is start, so that only one spin up is needed
per settings session, it would be acceptable, wouldn't it?
But I also thought from the point of view, that I hardly change settings
at all in 1 session. Most of the time I start the dap, press play for
Music or browse the DB, and then I put the DAP in my bag. While this,
settings menu in the core is kinda wasted.
But I also understand the issue voice/translation. That's a killer con
for me. Even though that's rather a general issue for all plugins. I
read somewhere that voice/translation for plugins has been planned (or
is at least wanted).
Thanks for your answers, looks like I allready can stop playing with
that idea ;)
Received on 2008-05-20
Page was last modified "Sat May 23 08:12:40 2020" The Rockbox Crew