On Thu, 18 Oct 2001, Justin Schoeman wrote:
>
> For a new application, I would say, go with v4l2. v4l2 should be in the
> 2.5 series kernel, and with Gerd's new patches, it is becomming easier
> to set up a 2.4 kernel with v4l2 (http://www.bytesex.org - look at the
> bttv0.8.x series).
>
> v4l is horribly bttv specific, and practically worthless for serious
> video capture applications.
>
> v4l2 is designed from the ground up to be a completely generic, yet
> flexible interface. It easily handles all the challenges of video
> recording.
>
> If you want a simple example of fully API compliant v4l and v4l2
> capture, have a look at NVrec on http://www.ee.up.ac.za/~justin/v4l2.
> Look out for all the comments in v4l1_core.c - you can easily see my
> opinion of v4l there!
Well - I'm a happy v4l2 user, capturing many hours of video per week using
it.
I was previously using Justin's bttv2 driver. Lately I'm using Gerd's
bttv 0.8 series with v4l2 support.
So that's two implementations - and compatibility seems pretty good.
I capture with mp1e (in the zapping cvs), though I must try NVrec again
sometime.
Steve
_______________________________________________
Video4linux-list mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/video4linux-list
