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

Re (3): Using a Fire-i camera



*	From: Camale&#xF3;n <noelamac@gmail.com>
*	Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 15:21:20 +0000 (UTC)
> And now I recall... I think the raw1394 interface was removed from Debian 
> kernel time ago, but I don't know what's its current status nor how this 
> finally affects Coriander, maybe you need to manually build/enable those 
> kernel modules again >:-?

Yes, raw1394 is obsolete.  I've installed vloopback-source 
and loaded the module.  That should be enough for the kernel.

> (look at the first message, what's that "juju" firewire stack the user 
> mentions? :-?)

The last two sentences in this section explain a little; although 
the link to reference [34] about migration to juju is dead.
"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IEEE_1394#Operating_system_support";
Similar information here.  http://www.mythtv.org/wiki/FireWire
I know of nothing more informative.

After a little trial and error I'll say that /dev/fw1 appears 
to be the output from vloopback.  /dev/fw0 gives an error 
as in my original enquiry.  Reasonable enough considering 
that vloopback duplicates a device for V4L usage.

> ... how this finally affects Coriander, ...

Appears that Coriander in Debian merely needs the default 
device updated from /dev/video0 to /dev/fw1.  A bug report is 
appropriate.

Now the remaining puzzle is that Skype and xawtv still can't use 
/dev/fw1.  Example.

peter@joule:~$ xawtv -device /dev/fw1
This is xawtv-3.95.dfsg.1, running on Linux/i686 (2.6.32-5-686)
xinerama 0: 1024x768+0+0
/dev/fw1: wrong device
v4l-conf had some trouble, trying to continue anyway
no video grabber device available
peter@joule:~$ 

Man v4l-conf tells that I shouldn't need to run v4l-conf directly.  
So what should be done next?

Thanks,                     ... Peter E.


-- 
New telephone 1 360 639 0202.  Old telephone 1 360 450 2132.  
bcc: peasthope at shaw.ca
Work "http://carnot.yi.org/";.
"http://members.shaw.ca/peasthope/index.html#Itinerary";.


Reply to: