titer at videolan
Feb 14, 2003, 7:41 AM
Post #2 of 5
(1672 views)
Permalink
|
> > Once that's done, architecture for some sort of
> > standard should come into play. I like v4l or v4l2..
> > should probably also get RAW types working.. some apps
> > prefer their data that way (though it's a waste of the
> > encoder heh)
>
> We should focus on stabilizing what works, we can play games after 1.0 :)
> As far as framework goes, I think V4L2 will be our best bet. V4L doesn't
> cut it and DVB seems, erm, complicated. I'm not opposed to adding
> additional application API's but we should choose one and let somebody else
> add the others. Probably should discuss it with the application guys
> (Videolan, MythTV, tvtime, etc.), since I didn't really get a definitive
> answer from the v4l list.
>
> [end excerpt]
>
> Hey Videolan guys, do you have a preference? :)
Well, I don't know kernel APIs enough to be sure ;)
I agree DVB is probably too complicated for PVR boards, one great thing in
V4L is that any program can get the MPEG stream very easily (this is how the
Kfir board currently works, which is quite convenient compared to satellite
cards). AFAIK V4L2 features /dev/codec devices so it could be the best
choice, although V4L may work as well.
--
Eric Petit <titer [at] videolan>
-------------------------------------------------------
This SF.NET email is sponsored by: FREE SSL Guide from Thawte
are you planning your Web Server Security? Click here to get a FREE
Thawte SSL guide and find the answers to all your SSL security issues.
http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?thaw0026en
_______________________________________________
ivtv-devel mailing list
ivtv-devel [at] lists
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/ivtv-devel
|
