Bug#677533: video: USB webcam fails since kernel 3.2
Hi,
On 07/11/2012 02:01 PM, Martin-Éric Racine wrote:
2012/7/11 Jean-Francois Moine <moinejf@free.fr>:
On Wed, 11 Jul 2012 14:14:24 +0300
Martin-Éric Racine <martin-eric.racine@iki.fi> wrote:
CC [M] /home/perkelix/gspca-2.15.18/build/ov534_9.o
/home/perkelix/gspca-2.15.18/build/ov534_9.c: In function ‘sd_init’:
/home/perkelix/gspca-2.15.18/build/ov534_9.c:1353:3: error: implicit
declaration of function ‘err’ [-Werror=implicit-function-declaration]
cc1: some warnings being treated as errors
make[2]: *** [/home/perkelix/gspca-2.15.18/build/ov534_9.o] Virhe 1
make[1]: *** [_module_/home/perkelix/gspca-2.15.18/build] Error 2
make[1]: Leaving directory `/usr/src/linux-headers-3.5.0-rc6+'
make: *** [modules] Error 2
Sorry, I did not compile yet with kernel >= 3.4.
So, please, edit the file build/ov534_9.c (and possibly other sources),
changing the calls to 'err' to 'pr_err'.
This was was required for both build/ov534_9.c and build/spca505.c to
build agaist 3.5.
Sure enough, this seems to fix support for this camera in both Cheese
and Skype. Hurray! :-)
Ok, so it seems that increasing the bandwidth we claim for the camera
(which is what my suggested "return 2000 * 2000 * 120;" change does, helps
a bit, where as the changes to vc032x which are in Jean-Francois Moine's
gspca-2.15.18 tarbal fix the problem entirely, correct?
Now, the only thing that remains is for this to be merged in the 3.5
tree, then backported to the 3.2 tree that is used for Debian's
upcoming Wheezy stable release (and for Ubuntu's recently released
Precise also).
Well we first need to turn the changes made in gspca-2.15.18 into
a patch will which apply to the latest gspca tree:
http://git.linuxtv.org/hgoede/gspca.git/shortlog/refs/heads/media-for_v3.6
And then apply them there, before the can be backported to older
kernels. Unfortunately I'm leaving for a week vacation Friday, and I
probably won't get around to this before then.
Jean-Francois, can you perhaps make a patch against my latest tree for
the poXXXX / PO3130 changes in your tarbal?
Regards,
Hans
Reply to: