Hi , On Tue, May 27, 2008 at 3:55 PM, Valent Turkovic <valent.turkovic@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Sat, May 24, 2008 at 7:34 AM, Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@xxxxxx> wrote: >> Bastien Nocera wrote: >>> >>> 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@xxxxxx) 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. >>> >> >> No list atm, noteworthy closed source ones are flash (adobe version) and >> skype. Opensource v4l1 viewers I know about are camomara, spcaview. But >> quite a few v4l2 apps also don't work with all v4l2 cams due to not >> supporting all needed colorformats, examples of these are for example xawtv >> and luvcview. >> >> I must say my primary focus at the moment is getting drivers cleaned up and >> merged in the mainline, but the userspace side of things definetely needs >> work too. >> >> Regards, >> >> Hans > > Is there something that Fedora users with few webcams that aren't > recognised under Fedora because of non-existing drivers can do to > help? Is there some way that we can give you feedback about webcams we > have so that they get supported? I know that that is a lame question > but I had to ask it. you can report your feedback to that respective webcam driver's upstream project mailing list. e.g. 1) If you got your webcam working using uvcvideo driver then you can report to uvc mailing list linux-uvc-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx also check http://linux-uvc.berlios.de/ 1) If you got your webcam working using gscpa driver then you can report to gspca mailing list spca50x-devs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Regards, Parag. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
