From owner-freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Apr 12 21:27:08 2005 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 26B2E16A4CE for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:27:08 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.vicor-nb.com (bigwoop.vicor-nb.com [208.206.78.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D268743D1D for ; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:27:07 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from [208.206.78.97] (julian.vicor-nb.com [208.206.78.97]) by mail.vicor-nb.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FE597A425; Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:27:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <425C3D2A.8030005@elischer.org> Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 14:27:06 -0700 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.5) Gecko/20050218 X-Accept-Language: en, hu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Christian Gusenbauer References: <425C18A2.8010807@elischer.org> <20050412193149.GA15619@puff.jakemsr.gom> <425C2C39.8050607@elischer.org> <200504122253.01522.c47g@gmx.at> In-Reply-To: <200504122253.01522.c47g@gmx.at> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Anyone working on V4L2 for BSD? X-BeenThere: freebsd-multimedia@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Multimedia discussions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:27:08 -0000 Christian Gusenbauer wrote: >Hi! > >On Tuesday, 12. April 2005 22:14, Julian Elischer wrote: > > >>Jacob Meuser wrote: >> >> >>>I'd much rather see the problems fixed than a shim added to it. >>>how about working about multiple frame buffers? that's probably need >>>for many V4L2 programs. IMO, it would be better (maybe even easier) >>>to rewrite bktr with a V4L2 interface than to try to add V4L2 to it. >>> >>> >>I wasn't planning on either, but rather making a v4l2 framework to allow >>drivers and utilities to hook to each other.. whether the bktr driver >>gets rewritten >>or shimmed is an orthogonal question :-) >> >> > >Well, that's exactly what I wrote some years ago. There's on one hand the v4l2 >framework and on the other hand there's a driver (in my case, it's a bktr >one) which registers itself at the v4l2 framework. Then, the latter creates >the device nodes and the applications use these nodes to get in contact with >the driver. Julian, I think that's what you are looking for, isn't it? > > yes I'd like to look at what you got done.. I'm also trying to contact the Linux developers about the ability to use their .h file directly. having a V4L interface available will make such things as gnomemeeting and SANE porting a LOT easier. >Ciao, >Christian. > >