Announcing a new F-10 Feature Proposal: Better Webcam Support
bnocera at redhat.com
Fri May 23 23:38:05 UTC 2008
On Fri, 2008-05-23 at 22:17 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Bastien Nocera wrote:
> > On Fri, 2008-05-23 at 11:24 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> >> Hans de Goede (j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl) said:
> >>> See:
> >>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/BetterWebcamSupport
> >> Any reason a shim library is simpler than porting apps to V4L2?
> > Same question here. There's a good number of applications that are
> > either obsoleted by a v4l2 version, or support both versions. Which
> > applications were you thinking of supporting with this scheme?
> > Unless there's tens of open source apps that would need changing, or a
> > couple of (useful) proprietary ones that don't support v4l2, the library
> > is probably not very useful to have (especially as you probably wouldn't
> > be able to port _all_ the v4l1 drivers to v4l2).
> See my reaction to Bill's question, and yes there are a few usefull proprietary
> apps in the mix unfortunately.
Do you have a list of those apps? Both the proprietary ones and the Open
Source ones. For the latter, it could be more interesting to create a
guide for the conversion from V4L1 to V4L2, and see whether Fedora
maintainers of those projects can help out with the conversion, or at
least submit it upstream for consideration.
> > You might also want to see what can be done to remove GStreamer's V4L2
> > plugin's experimental status:
> > http://tinyurl.com/4ft7ej
> That definitely the plan as I want cheese to be working 100% out of the box.
More information about the devel