Em Wed, 6 Jun 2018 12:51:16 +0200
Pavel Machek <pa...@ucw.cz> escreveu:

> > > > The scenario that I could think of is:
> > > > - legacy app would call open(/dev/video?), which would be handled by
> > > > libv4l open hook (v4l2_open()?),  
> > >
> > > I don't think that kind of legacy apps is in use any more. I'd prefer
> > > not to deal with them.  
> > 
> > In another thread ("[ANN v2] Complex Camera Workshop - Tokyo - Jun,
> > 19"), Mauro has mentioned a number of those:
> > 
> > "open source ones (Camorama, Cheese, Xawtv, Firefox, Chromium, ...) and 
> > closed
> > source ones (Skype, Chrome, ...)"  
> 
> Thanks for thread pointer... I may be able to get in using hangouts.
> 
> Anyway, there's big difference between open("/dev/video0") and
> v4l2_open("/dev/video0"). I don't care about the first one, but yes we
> should be able to support the second one eventually.
> 
> And I don't think Mauro says apps like Camorama are of open() kind.

All open source apps we care use v4l2_open() & friends. the ones
that use just open() work via LD_PRELOAD. It is a hack, but it
was needed when libv4l was added (as there were lots of apps
to be touched). Also, we had problems on that time with closed
source app developers. I guess nowadays, among v4l-specific
apps, only closed source ones use just open().

Haven't check how browsers open cameras, though. A quick look at the
Fedora 60 dependencies, though, doesn't show libv4l:

        
https://rpmfind.net/linux/RPM/fedora/devel/rawhide/x86_64/f/firefox-60.0.1-5.fc29.x86_64.html

It might be statically linking libv4l, or maybe they rely on something
else (like java/flash/...), but I guess it is more likely that they're
just using open() somehow. The same kind of issue may also be present
on other browsers and on java libraries.

Thanks,
Mauro

Reply via email to