[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: starting irexec in a startup script



If I start irexec from console, not at sstartup, then it works. As you said I should check if the irexec starts before lircd.

On 9/21/05, Simo Kauppi < swk@nic.fi> wrote:
On Wed, Sep 21, 2005 at 10:58:47AM +0300, Andras Lorincz wrote:
> Yes, something like that.
>
> On 9/20/05, Simo Kauppi <swk@nic.fi> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 19, 2005 at 01:42:53PM +0300, Andras Lorincz wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > The lirc daemon starts at startup and I want to launch the command
> > "irexec
> > > --daemon" too. To achieve this I made a script in /etc/init.d which
> > contains
> > > this:
> > >
> > > #!/bin/bash
> > >
> > > su lorand -c "irexec --daemon"
> > >
> > > then I ran the command " update-rc.d irexec_stup defaults" (lorand is the
> > > username). After restart I can see the process of irexec but nothing
> > happens
> > > when I press the button on the remote. Also the process is owned by
> > lorand
> > > as it should. Why is that it doesn't respond to commands, or should I do
> > it
> > > another way?
> >
> > This might be a stupid question, but do you have
> > proc = irexec
> > button = something
> > config = something
> > in your .lircrc to tell the daemon what it should do?
> >

Have you tried killing the daemon and starting it from the command line?

If it works that way, is it possible that the lirc-modules are not
loaded when it starts from the init script?

Obviously the irexec should be started after the lirc-daemon is started.

If it doesn't work, are the lirc-modules loaded? They should be, since
the lirc-daemon is running, right?

Also make sure, that lirc is using the correct configuration for your
remote.

Sorry I can't help more since I've been using the ir_kbd for awhile now.

Simo
--
:r ~/.signature


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFDMXQF4RQe7Exc22QRAoRpAJ4kcUw+bvY+BcdvD61kBQ/DwF6U4gCeP9EZ
hHcL80PW7FZhQTg3S+otTEU=
=hxK8
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----




Reply to: