On 05/06/2020 02:59, Nicholas D Steeves wrote: > Please add to the Debian description a comparison between ltunify and > existing packages in Debian that provide this functionality. eg: Why > should people who use these existing packages try ltunify? Solaar-cli > is deprecated, so maybe that?
No problem, I will add something describing that. > When I look at the existing description, I think "neat, someone > reinvented the wheel", and see nothing that convinces me to migrate to > ltunify. It's also worth mentioning that ltunify doesn't support HID++ > 2.0 whereas Solaar does, and possibly adding an example of the newest > Logitech device that ltunify supports. HID++ 2.0 support was added for v0.2. I'm not sure exactly which features this covers, but I will look through and see what I can find. > Thank you for documenting everything at the upstream website :-) Reading > that document I get a clear sense of your enthusiasm for this work, and > I wonder if ltunify's Debian description could be framed in a way that > spoke to those who share a similar passion for reverse engineering > protocols? I wish I could claim credit but ltunify and all the documentation is entirely the work of Peter Wu. I've just done the packaging for Debian. I will mention the reverse engineering and the thorough documentation in the package description however, so that someone looking for a learning opportunity might find it. > There are enough people using Logitech peripherals that we really ought > to have native-desktop-integrated pairing for GNOME and KDE Plasma by > now, rather than a tray application. I wonder if the missing piece is a > libsolaar or libltunify... Peter looks to have put some work into refactoring ltunify into a library with a frontend, as part of the "refactor-lib" branch, but this has not had a release yet so I am not sure if this is in a working state. Kind regards, Anthony
