[vlc-devel] Re: [Patch] better support for more recent pvr: drivers

Jean-Paul Saman jean-paul.saman at planet.nl
Sat Mar 31 17:13:06 CEST 2007

Paul Corke wrote:
> Antoine Cellerier wrote:
> :: jpsaman commented on your patch but i'm not sure that
> :: you got the answer since you're not on the list.
> I am on the list, but our corporate spam checker ate the
> message :(
> On Tue 27/03/2007 08:52, Jean-Paul Saman wrote:
>>> The videodev2.h file is copied from the ivtv sources.
>> Please don't do that, just create a check for videodev2.h in 
>> configure.ac when pvr is selected.
> The original vlc (eg 0.8.6) has a copy of videodev2.h in the
> modules/access/ directory.  If I check in configure for the
> system copy of videodev2.h then:
> 1) I have to make sure that pvr.c does not use the old
>    videodev2.h in modules/access/ (easy: just delete that
>    file)

Maybe for backwards compatibility you shouldn't.

> 2) A vlc built on an older machine with an older 
>    /usr/include/linux/videodev2.h would not be able to
>    compile in features that are needed on a newer kernel
>    / ivtvdriver.  The build would have to be on a new machine.

Check for (versions or features) in configure.ac
> 3) In my build environment (Fedora Core 5 with 2.6.20-1.2300.fc5)
>    trying to build my patched pvr.c using the system
>    /usr/include/linux/videodev2.h does not work because
>    it is too old a version of the file!

The the user should upgrade to the new version of ivtv. Having a copy of 
this file from the ivtv drivers in our own archive does really suck. We 
should change it now or regret it for ever.

> Unless there is a way around this, I think we're stuck
> with using a local copy of videodev2.h :(

Is this /usr/include/linux/videodev2.h file the same as the one we use 
in vlc?

>> I found some minor improvements for readibility. See the
>> code below.
> Ok, I'm happy to make those cosmetic changes.  I would
> justify my preference for "++p_controls->count;" to
> your "p_controls->count++;" because I usually write in
> C++ and pre-increment is more efficient there!
>>  but perhaps the original author can comment also?
> Yes please!
> Paul.

Jean-Paul Saman.

This is the vlc-devel mailing-list, see http://www.videolan.org/vlc/
To unsubscribe, please read http://developers.videolan.org/lists.html

More information about the vlc-devel mailing list