From owner-freebsd-current Mon May 13 10:50:55 1996 Return-Path: owner-current Received: (from root@localhost) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) id KAA08298 for current-outgoing; Mon, 13 May 1996 10:50:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from precipice.shockwave.com (precipice.shockwave.com [171.69.108.33]) by freefall.freebsd.org (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA08293 for ; Mon, 13 May 1996 10:50:49 -0700 (PDT) Received: from shockwave.com (localhost.shockwave.com [127.0.0.1]) by precipice.shockwave.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA10748; Mon, 13 May 1996 10:49:55 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199605131749.KAA10748@precipice.shockwave.com> To: "matthew c. mead" cc: current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: lkm qcam In-reply-to: Your message of "Mon, 13 May 1996 11:32:11 EDT." <199605131532.LAA00694@neon.Glock.COM> Date: Mon, 13 May 1996 10:49:55 -0700 From: Paul Traina Sender: owner-current@freebsd.org X-Loop: FreeBSD.org Precedence: bulk qcamcontrol is an example program that uses the qcam driver, if that's what you mean. I occasionally use the driver in lkm mode for testing, however there are definitely some problems, either with the driver, or more likely with the LKM interface, because if you: load lkm access qcam unload lkm access qcam the system crashes rather than returning device unconfigured. :-( Paul From: "matthew c. mead" Subject: lkm qcam What is the status of this lkm? How thorougly has it been tested? Does anyone have code that's been converted to use this access method? Any info is appreciated. Thanks! -matt -- Matthew C. Mead mmead@Glock.COM http://www.Glock.COM/~mmead/