From: Roman H. <hi...@id...> - 2010-02-03 01:08:42
|
Hi, recently I bought a Microsoft Webcam that was not supported by the V4L1 backend of the libvidcap library, because the driver was missing some features in the V4L1 compatibility layer. Therefore I am working since 2 Weeks at a V4L2 backend. Basically it's working, but there are still lot's of missing features and lot's of unnecessary debug messages in the code. I have tested it with two Webcams so far. The Microsoft Webcam is working, but the Quickcam Messanger at my work has a Bayer BGRG output that is not yet supported by the conversion code (I found code in here though, but haven't checked the license yet. URL: http://home.mag.cx/messenger/ ). Now I saw, that after a small break, there is some activity in the SVN tree again. I hope that you guys didn't already have some V4L2 code at home that is pending for a commit. If not, I want to discuss in what kind of way you would accept a V4L2 Backend patch to include in your library. In the moment. I split the v4l_sapi into two separate parts, one that handles V4L1 and the other that handles V4L2. If the v4l_sapi detects that the device to open can handle the V4L2 API, the newer interface is chosen; Otherwise the old code is used. Would you accpet that kind of design, or would you like to have two complete seperate sapi interfaces for the two V4L APIs? Greetings from a freezing Cologne, Roman |