Re: [OpenH323]Re: [GnomeMeeting-list] [PATCH] Better integration with Video4Linux for PWLIB

The PWC drivers have also always worked well, for me, with GnomeMeeting.

Please don't let a less than well-considered rant drive you off.

More to the point, I've pretty much standardized on Phillips chips to take advantage of the PWC driverset. It works reliably, and I have few issues.

I use it for GnomeMeeting, OhPhone, and in Camstream, for my astronomy.


Nemosoft Unv. wrote:

On Tuesday 23 September 2003 00:17, Derek Smithies wrote:

I'll be short on this one.


One of the goals of linux people the world over is to replace MS with
Linux. This is fine. Consequently, for linux to be usable by the masses,
things like cameras, programs, drivers etc have to be installed simply.
No requirements for fiddling around with new kernels, editing conf files,
building from source.

It should be
  rpm -Uvh gnomemeeting.rpm

Now, cameras (usb ones in particular) are easy to install. Just plug it
in. Non usb camera may require a grabber card.

You see - just plug it in and it goes. This is what the Microsoft
interface is aiming for.

In the four years that I have been involved in openh323, reading the
list, helping people,
my view is the biggest pain in the ass is camera and sound.

Buggy drivers, (drivers that fail to meet the spec)
Authors who say, my driver meets the spec - it works with xawtv.
This is  a stupid and obnoxious comment.

STOP the crap software. fix the driver. make the driver meet the spec.
work harder. get it right.

Upon reading this rant, I decided to stop following this discussion. Furthermore, I'm not going to help anyone anymore with Gnomemeeting problems. First off: the PWC drivers work excellent with a lot of software; not just xawtv or another single tool. The PWC driver meets the "spec", as far as that means anything because the document is sometimes vague, and incomplete. I even daresay PWC behaves a lot better than other webcam drivers.

I content I may have accidently broken something in recent PWC version. Fine, it happens, I know. No problem, we'll fix it. But for that, I need your help! Linux is all about open source. So in case something breaks, you can have a look yourself and see where I'm going wrong. But no, all I get are messages like: "hey, the size your PWC returns is wrong , NOW FIX IT!". Sorry, I don't respond very well to that.

openh323 is criticised because it does not work. Why does openh323 not
work? Cause the driver writer did not do his/her job correctly.

I don't want to know about adding extra options to conf files. The
default option should always work.

If linux video and sound drivers cannot work "out of the box", then there
is no hope of overtaking microsoft.

I have obsolutely no interest in taking over Microsoft. Sorry, this anit-MS attitude I find highly annoying.

Yes, I know that microsoft code has many drivers that "don't work right".
That is no excuse.
The goal for linux is for all drivers to work.
If we can achieve that goal, linux has a chance.



P.S. sorry for venting/ranting, but I am sick of substandard driver code.
   it wastes so much developer time, getting applications to work with
    buggy drivers.

Thanks, you've just labeled 3 years of quite dedicated work as "substandard".

On Mon, 22 Sep 2003, Nemosoft Unv. wrote:


On Monday 22 September 2003 00:02, Derek Smithies wrote:

Modifying kernel code, or adding module parameters, are a pain.

Not really. You can always send a patch to the apropriate maintainer
(that would be me :))) It will then eventually percolate into kernels
on user's systems. The most important thing is not to break (too many)
existing applications.


You see, it means that anyone else who uses the QuickCam has to do
the same.

Your patch is "fine", in that it works.
However, I really really don't want to add it, cause that will change
the operation of the pwlib v4l code for all cameras.

Can I suggest that you modify your patch, so that it uses the hint
table, line 200 of video4linux.cxx
Modify the hint table so it includes a section for your QuickCam
camera. and put a new hint in the hint table.

The new hint is

Then,  you have in your changes.
  your code;
} else {
   previous code;

Thus, if the camera is QuickCam, it uses your code.
    if the camera is anything else, nothing changes.

If I may? First off, I think it's a bad idea to put too much camera
specific code in your program. Second, if you do it, try to do it in
the most general way possible. The QuickCam is using my PWC driver, and
although I admit that driver is slightly "broken" in this case, your
code should then work on all PWC supported cams, since they all suffer
from the same problem, in which case I'm happy to point you to my API
document on which includes a
PWC detection routine.

- Nemosoft

Gerry Creager -- gerry creager tamu edu
Network Engineering -- AATLT, Texas A&M University	
Cell: 979.229.5301 Office: 979.458.4020 FAX: 979.847.8578
Page: 979.228.0173
Office: 903A Eller Bldg, TAMU, College Station, TX 77843

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]