Hi,
On 03/19/2010 04:49 PM, David Ellingsworth wrote:
On Fri, Mar 19, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Mauro Carvalho Chehab
<mchehab@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
The V4L1 drivers that lasts are the ones without maintainers and probably without
a large users base. So, basically legacy hardware. So, their removals make sense.
In many ways the above statement is a catch 22. Most, if not all the
v4l1 drivers are currently broken or unmaintained.
Ack, which is why I've been working actively on moving them all over to
gspca, but I need hardware access for that, see below.
However this thread is about removing support for v4l1 applications, and
there are actually still quite a few v4l1 apps out there, so we should
not do that!
> However, this does
not mean there are users who would not be using these drivers if they
actually worked or had been properly maintained. I know this to be a
fact of the ibmcam driver. It is both broken and unmaintained. Because
of this I'm sure no one is currently using it. I happen to have a USB
camera which is supposedly supported by the ibmcam driver.
Unfortunately, I have not the time nor expertise needed to
update/fix/replace this driver, though I have previously tried. If
someone on this list is willing to collaborate with me to make a
functional v4l2 driver to replace the existing ibmcam driver, I'd be
more than willing to expend more time and energy in doing so.
Great! I've bene looking for someone with such a cam. As you may know
I've been slowly porting over all the remaining v4l1 usb webcam drivers
to gspca (removing a lot of code duplication and making them v4l2 drivers).
By far the easiest way to get the driver for this camera converted to
a gspca using v4l2 driver is to send it to me, would you be willing to
do that ?
Regards,
Hans
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
