On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 19:45 +0100, Hans de Goede wrote: > Hi All, > > One of the few reasons why Fedora is my distro of choice is because its usually > cutting edge, and I like to be where the development is happening. > > However today I've had an encounter with Fedora which make me wonder if > sometimes we aren't a little too cutting edge. I tried to get an industrial > firewire camera to work with the stock Fedora kernel using the juju stack. Long > story short, it didn't work. > > Which after reading: http://wiki.linux1394.org/JujuMigration Isn't really > surprising, quoting that page: "Almost no support for IIDC cameras: Not > compatible with libdc1394 v1. Highly experimental support in libdc1394 v2 which > works with some luck on only a few OHCI 1.1 controllers. Improvements are to be > expected in Linux 2.6.25-rc1." > > Notice how a preliminary fix is expected for 2.6.25, which probably means that > this will still be broken in Fedora 9, notice that the breakage was introduced > in Fedora 7, so thats 18 months worth of broken firewire camera support (iow > most digital video cameras). Add to that that the above referenced wiki page > also says: "Regarding Linux 2.6.22 and 2.6.23, the best advice to Linux > distributors (kernel packagers) ... is: Build only the old IEEE 1394 drivers." libdc1394 isn't part of Fedora, so that's outside the scope of this discussion. As for the necessary Juju bits, they're already in Fedora 7 and Fedora 8. See this bug: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=344851 That fix is included in kernel 2.6.23.9-44.fc7, 2.6.23.9-78.fc8, and rawhide. It'll hit the *upstream* kernel in 2.6.25. We were able to write that fix *because* the Juju stack was available in Fedora. -w
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
