Le March 30, 2008 12:05:51 pm Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : > Filipus Klutiero a écrit : > > Le March 29, 2008 04:58:06 pm Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : > >> On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 04:41:04PM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote: > >>> Le March 29, 2008 04:29:42 pm Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : > >>>> On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 03:39:42PM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote: > >>>>> Le March 29, 2008 03:32:35 pm Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : > >>>>>> Filipus Klutiero a écrit : > >>>>>>> Le March 29, 2008 03:10:03 pm Aurelien Jarno, vous avez écrit : > >>>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 02:23:33PM -0400, Filipus Klutiero wrote: > >>>>>>>>> Package: luvcview > >>>>>>>>> Version: 20070512-3 > >>>>>>>>> Severity: normal > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> luvcview fails to start, although I know the camera works from > >>>>>>>>> Kopete. > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> $ luvcview > >>>>>>>>> luvcview version 0.2.1 > >>>>>>>>> Video driver: x11 > >>>>>>>>> A window manager is available > >>>>>>>>> video /dev/video0 > >>>>>>>>> Unable to set format: 22. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> You camera does not support the default format. Try to specify > >>>>>>>> another format using -f yuv|jpg > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> It works with yuv, but not with jpg. Should all cameras support > >>>>>>> jpg or is it just the default that's incorrect? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Not all the cameras support jpg, and not all of them support yuv. > >>>>>> There is no sane default. > >>>>> > >>>>> OK, but that doesn't answer my question. Should all cameras support > >>>>> jpg even though they don't all do it or is it luvcview which is just > >>>>> not trying hard > >>>> > >>>> I don't know exactly, but I don't think they should all support jpg. > >>> > >>> So why do you think this isn't a luvcview bug? In any case, if you > >>> don't know exactly, surely luvcview should at least fail more cleanly. > >> > >> It does already explain the problem: > >> > >> "Unable to set format: 22." > > > > Indeed, I suppose that someone familiar with the source code would > > understand what this means. > > Error 22 is EINVAL, which just confirms that the camera doesn't support > this format. > > > Anyway, since nobody is sure that the camera is the issue, wouldn't it be > > safer to reopen this report until someone is confident that the problem > > is elsewhere? > > I am sure that the problem is that your camera doesn't support this format.
Then why did you write yesterday that you didn't "think they should all support jpg." ?
